i"^^" 


^m 


ifi^y*'. 


I.  .V  .  i 


-/  i^^i<^r>-^' 


y-fc^  ^ 


^xlncj^ton  ^hcoXoQiCiil  Jgumiitavg. 


INAUGURATION 


OF  THE 


REV.  GEERHARDUS  VOS.  PH.D.,  D.D.. 


PROFESSOR 


BIBLICAL    THEOLOGY. 


NEW  YORK: 

ANSON   D.   F.   RANDOLPH 
&  COMPANY. 

(incorporated) 

182    FIFTH    AVENUE. 

1894. 


PREFATORY  NOTE. 


The  Rev.  Geerhardus  Vos,  Ph.D.,  D.D.,  was  elected 
Professor  of  Biblical  Theology  in  Princeton  Theological 
Seminary  at  the  spring  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Directors, 
1893,  and  assumed  the  duties  of  the  chair  provisionally  from 
September,  1893.  His  formal  induction  into  the  chair  took 
place  on  Tuesday,  May  8,  1894,  at  12  o'clock,  in  the  First 
Presbyterian  Church  of  Princeton.  The  order  of  exercises 
on  this  occasion  was  as  follows  : 

Hymn. 

Prayer,  by  the  Hon.  James  A.  Beaver,  LL.D. 

Administration  of  the  Pledge  to  the  New  Professor,  by  the 
Rev.  William  C.  Cattell,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  First  Vice-President 
of  the  Board  of  Directors. 

The  Charge,  by  the  Rev.  Abraham  Gosman,  D.D.,  Pastor  of  the 
Church  at  Lawrenceville,  N.  J. 

The  Inaugural  Address,  by  Professor  Vos. 

Hymn. 

Benediction,  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  James  McCosh,  ex-President  of  the 
College  of  New  Jersey. 


The  Charge  and  Inaugural  Address  are  here  published  by  order  of 
the  Board  of  Directors. 


THE  CHARGE. 


THE   REV.  ABRAHAM   GOSMAN,  D.D. 


CHARGE. 

My  Dear  Brother: 

The  Theology  taught  in  this  institution  has,  as  we  beHeve, 
been  Biblical  from  the  beginning  of  its  history,  in  the  sense 
not  only  that  its  teachings  have  been  in  accordance  with  the 
Bible,  but  that  they  have  been  drawn  from  the  Bible  as  their 
ultimate  source.  It  may  be  fairly  claimed  that  it  has  always 
sought  to  honor  the  infallible  Word  of  God,  and  has  recog- 
nized the  truth  that  from  its  teachings,  when  once  clearly 
ascertained,  there  is  no  appeal. 

Neither  is  it  true  that  Biblical  Theology  even  in  its  techni- 
cal sense,  i.  c,  as  that  branch  of  theological  science  which 
regards  and  treats  the  doctrinal  and  ethical  contents  of  the 
Bible  in  their  historical  surroundings  and  development,  is  new 
in  the  curriculum  of  study  prescribed  here.  We  have  had 
illustrious  teachers  here  in  this  very  line.  Those  of  us  who 
were  permitted  to  sit  at  the  feet  of  that  splendid  scholar  and 
teacher,  Dr.  Joseph  Addison  Alexander,  will  readily  recall 
how  he  opened  to  us  the  contents  of  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  in  their  historical  connections  and  surroundings. 
We  were  like  those  who  feel  the  quickening  breath  of  the 
morning,  and  see  the  eastern  horizon  flashing  with  the  light 
of  the  coming  day.  We  walked  for  a  time  along  the  old 
paths,  but  as  in  a  new  world  which  we  were  to  explore,  and 
in  which  the  richest  mines  should  repay  our  search.  Nor  can 
those  who  fell  under  the  influence  of  that  other  great  teacher, 
Dr.  Caspar  Wistar  Hodge,  whom  God  gave  to  us  and  has  so 
recently  taken  away,  and  whose  successor,  in  some  sense,  so 
far  as  Biblical  Theology  is  concerned,  you  are,  fail  to  recog- 
nize how  he  led  you  along  the  pathway  you  are  still  seeking 
to  tread,  and  called  to  your  more  leisurely  notice  the  pros- 
pects and  the  outlooks  which  greeted  you  at  every  step,  as  he 
opened  to  you  the  Scriptures. 


viii  Charge. 

It  is  not,  therefore,  a  new  branch  of  Biblical  science  which 
you  are  called  to  teach.  And  yet  it  is  comparatively  new,  in 
the  definiteness  of  the  field  assigned  it,  in  the  closely  limited 
relations  it  sustains  to  the  other  branches  of  Biblical  science, 
in  the  history  of  its  growth  and  progress,  in  the  methods  it 
pursues,  in  the  fruits  which  have  been  already  gathered,  and 
in  the  well-grounded  hopes  of  richer  fruits  in  the  future.  It 
is  a  field  which  will  amply  repay  the  most  assiduous  culture, 
and  upon  which  a  man  may  enter  with  glowing  hopes,  and, 
with  the  blessing  of  God,  come  back  from  his  toil  bringing  his 
sheaves  with  him. 

Biblical  Theology  stands  in  close  relations  both  to  Exegeti- 
cal  and  Systematic  Theology,  and  yet  has  its  own  well-defined 
bounds.  It  presupposes  Exegetical  Theology  ;  it  furnishes  the 
material  for  Systematic  Theology.  If  Systematic  Theology  is, 
as  we  may  conceive  it  to  be,  the  finished  building,  harmonious 
in  its  proportions,  symmetrical  and  beautiful ;  then  Exegetical 
Theology  may  be  regarded  as  the  quarry  from  which  the 
material  is  taken  ;  and  Biblical  Theology,  as  putting  the  granite 
blocks  into  form,  not  polished  and  graven,  but  shaped  and 
fitted  for  the  place  they  are  to  fill,  as  the  structure  grows  in  its 
vastness  and  beauty.  It  seeks  the  saving  facts  and  truths  as 
they  lie  in  the  Word,  and  are  embedded,  and  to  some  extent 
expressed,  in  the  history  of  the  people  of  God.  God's  meth- 
ods are  always  historical  and  genetic,  and  it  conforms  to  Kis 
methods.  It  views  these  words  and  facts  in  their  historical 
relations  and  their  progressive  development.  It  aims  not 
merely  to  arrive  at  the  ideas  and  facts  as  they  appear  in  par- 
ticular authors  and  in  the  books  justly  ascribed  to  them,  and  as 
they  may  be  modified  in  their  form  by  time,  culture,  in- 
fluences friendly  or  hostile ;  but  to  set  forth  these  facts  and 
truths  thus  ascertained  in  their  relation  to  the  other  books  in 
which  they  may  appear  in  clearer  light, — to  trace  their  progress 
and  unfolding  from  the  germ  to  the  ripened  fruit.  As  the 
stream  of  sacred  history  runs  parallel  with  that  of  revelation, 
it  borders  closely  upon  Historical  Theology.  But  the  two 
conceptions  are  distinct. 


Charge.  ix 

Biblical  Theology  serves  also  important  purposes  in  its 
evidential  bearings  and  force.  It  throws  light  upon  passages 
which  may  have  appeared  doubtful  to  mere  exegetical  and 
critical  study,  but  viewed  in  the  light  of  the  results  which 
Biblical  Theology  has  attained,  and  as  lying  directly  along 
the  line  of  the  gradual  unfolding  of  the  truth,  it  becomes  ap- 
parent at  once  that  they  belong  to  the  divine  Word.  They 
fall  fitly  into  the  time  and  place  in  which  they  occur;  they  are 
indispensable  to  the  full  revelation  of  the  truth.  To  leave 
them  out  would  make  a  break  in  the  process  which  could  not 
be  remedied.  In  the  line  of  the  Messianic  teaching,  e.g., 
which  runs  through  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  there  are 
passages  which  fair  and  honest  criticism  even  leaves  in  doubt, 
if  not  as  to  their  genuineness,  yet  as  to  their  interpretation, 
but  which,  seen  in  the  light  of  the  final  results  of  Biblical 
Theology,  fall  into  their  true  place  in  the  historical  develop- 
ment of  the  Messianic  promise  and  are  found  to  be  essential  to 
its  completeness.  We  not  only  see  at  once  that  they  con- 
stitute a  part  of  the  records  of  Revelation,  but  know  their  im- 
port and  interpretation.  This  evidential  bearing  of  his  work 
ought  to  have  great  weight  with  the  teacher  of  Biblical 
Theology.  For  while  a  strictly  scientific  definition  of  Biblical 
Theology  may  exclude  all  exegetical  investigation  and  relegate 
it  entirely  to  its  own  branch,  practically  the  two  branches  run 
into  one  another.  The  student  of  Biblical  Theology  must 
know  whether  the  results  of  exegesis  are  such  as  to  justify 
him  in  accepting  them.  He  must  test  the  ground  upon  which 
he  stands.  He  cannot  take  with  any  satisfaction  or  certainty 
the  books  of  the  Bible  as  trustworthy  or  authoritative  without 
an  investigation  of  his  own.  And  since  the  saving  facts  and 
truths  of  revelation  are  interwoven  with  the  sacred  history,  well- 
nigh  inseparable  from  it,  he  must  know  that  the  records  of 
this  history  are  absolutely  genuine  and  accurate.  While 
they  are  diversified  in  form,  according  to  their  human  authors 
and  surroundings,  they  bear  their  divine  stamp.  For  these 
human  authors  were  men  chosen  by  God,  brought  into  the 
world,  placed  in  their  peculiar  conditions,  endowed  with  their 


X  Charge. 

peculiar  qualifications,  mental  and  spiritual,  trained  by  special 
experiences,  providential  and  gracious,  quickened  and  guided 
in  their  writings  so  that  the  whole  result  should  be  as  God 
would  have  it — the  inspired  Word  of  God.  In  ascertaining,  or 
rather  in  verifying  this  result,  he  may  well  use  the  fruits  and 
issues  of  his  own  special  science,  in  solving  the  doubts  which 
criticism  has  left  or  created.  Nor  would  this  be  reasoning  in 
a  circle,  as  if  he  first  reached  the  result  by  the  aid  of  doubtful 
passages  and  his  interpretation  of  them,  and  then  used  this 
result  as  confirming  their  absolute  correctness  or  inerrancy 
and  the  interpretation  he  has  given  them.  For  the  result 
here,  as  with  every  essential  doctrine  of  the  Sacred  Scripture, 
does  not  depend  upon  specific  passages  merely,  but  upon  the 
general  drift  and  teaching  of  the  Word  of  God. 

But  assuming  now,  that  Biblical  Theology  deals  with  the  in- 
spired and  infallible  records  of  Revelation  as  exegetically 
ascertained,  seeks  to  reproduce  the  doctrinal  and  ethical  con- 
tents of  the  Bible  in  their  historical  relations,  aims  to  ascertain 
what  are  the  teachings  of  the  inspired  Word  in  their  diversified 
forms  and  historical  order  and  in  their  continuous  develop- 
ment, how  must  we  study  its  sources?  It  is  often  said,  that 
we  must  come  to  the  Bible  as  we  come  to  other  books  claim- 
ing our  attention  ;  that  if  God  has  revealed  Himself  and  re- 
vealed His  will  in  saving  words,  using  human  agents  to  com- 
municate them,  these  words  must  be  interpreted  according  to 
the  laws  which  govern  all  human  languages ;  that  we  must 
apply  the  same  principles  of  construction  here  as  elsewhere. 
This  is  all  true,  and  must  be  insisted  upon,  if  we  would  be  fair 
and  honest  in  our  investigation.  There  is  no  other  method  by 
which  we  can  reach  valid  and  satisfactory  results.  But  if,  when 
it  is  said  that  we  must  come  to  the  study  of  the  Bible  as  we  come 
to  the  study  of  other  books,  it  is  meant  that  we  arc  to  forget 
that  the  Bible  has  its  life  and  history' ;  what  it  has  done  for  the 
individual,  for  society,  for  the  State,  for  the  progress  of  civil- 
ization ;  that  all  that  is  lovely  and  of  good  report  has  found  its 
roots  and  life  in  this  book  ;  that  it  has  in  all  ages  been  the 
fruitful  source  of  good,  and  of  good  only, — if  that  is  what  is 


Charge,  xi 

meant,  then  it  is  both  unreasonable  and  absurd.     It  is  absurd 
to  suppose  that  we  can,  at  will,  divest  ourselves  of  those  in- 
fluences which  are  entwined  with  every  thread   and  fibre  of 
our  being,  which  are  so  intimately  associated  with  our  most 
sacred  experience,  and  to  which  we  owe  largely  the  position 
we  now  occupy  and  the  very  power  to  make  any  intelligent 
investigation.     And  it  is  unreasonable,  if  it  were  not  absurd. 
The  Bible  has  its  place  and  brings  its  own  history.     It  carries 
upon  its  face  and  in  its  whole  spirit  its  real  nature.     It  points 
the  student  to  what  it  has  done,  and  what  must  therefore  be 
its  vital  truth  and  force,  as  it  submits  itself  to  his  investiga- 
tion.    No  interest  of  truth   or  goodness  can  be  secured  by 
blotting  out  its  history.     No  man  will  gain  a  truer  knowledge 
of  its  contents  by  shutting  out   the  light  and  heat  which  it 
gives.     A  man  may  investigate  the  sun,  the  laws  of  its  motion, 
its  peculiar  structure,  its  relation  to  other  suns  and  systems ; 
but  what  would  he  know  of  the  sun  if  he  should  disregard 
the  fact  that  it  has  been  pouring  out  with  the  utmost  lavish- 
ness  its  flood  of  light  and  heat  from  the  beginning,  and  is 
still  pouring  them  out  with  undiminished  fullness  and  splendor, 
or  if  he  should  insist  upon  beginning  his  investigation  with  a 
denial  that  it  shines  at  all?     Other  bodies  are  not  luminous, 
therefore  the  sun  cannot  be.     Other  books  are  not  from  God, 
therefore  the  Bible  must  be  a  human  book,  and  we  must  deal 
with  it   as  such.     But  the  Bible  comes  to  us  as  both  human 
and  divine.     It  claims  recognition  for  what  it  has  done,  and 
demands  investigation  under  these  conditions.    As  the  Apostle 
concentrates,  condenses  into  one  single  word,  "  therefore,"  his 
splendid  exhibition  of  the  Gospel,  in  his  letter  to  the  Romans, 
as  it  takes  the  sinner  from  his  guilt  and   pollution   up   into 
fellowship  with  Christ  in  His  purity  and  glory,  all  issuing  from 
the   eternal    and    electing   purpose    of   God;    and   then  with 
all  his  fervor  and  love  presses  the  whole  argument  upon  his 
readers,  "I  beseech  you  therefore'"',  so  the  Bible  comes  to  us 
with  its  past  history  and  work,  as  it  has  illumined  the  dark- 
ness, relieved  the  suffering,  broken  the  bonds  of  the  oppressed, 
lifted  men  into  fellowship  with  Christ,  enriched  them   with 


xii  ^  Charge. 

deathless  hopes,  and  says,  as  it  opens  wide  its  doors  to  all 
honest  search  and  scrutiny,  "  therefore  "  let  your  investiga- 
tion be  thorough,  but  with  a  full  recognition  of  the  facts  and 
all  that  they  imply. 

This  will  in  no  way  restrict  your  freedom.  The  Bible 
seeks  no  concealment.  It  rather  demands  investigation,  and 
its  friends  have  no  reason  to  fear  the  issue.  The  word  of  God 
makes  free,  and  requires  freedom.  Just  as  the  believer,  when 
he  comes  to  Christ  and  takes  His  will  as  the  law  of  his  life,  is 
under  bonds  to  Christ  and  is  made  the  Lord's  freeman,  so  the 
man  who  bows  his  reason,  as  he  bows  his  will,  to  the  authority 
of  the  divine  word,  is  loosed  from  all  other  bonds.  He  is  free 
to  prosecute  his  researches  in  all  legitimate  methods.  No 
human  authority  can  restrict  his  liberty.  And  this  institution 
has  never  sought  and  does  not  now  seek  to  lessen  the  freedom 
of  investigation.  It  welcomes  light  from  every  quarter,  while 
it  honors  the  Word  and  insists  that  there  is  no  appeal  from  its 
decisions.  Traditional  interpretations  are  to  be  treated  in  all 
the  new  light  which  has  been  thrown  upon  them  in  the  large 
advance  of  modern  science.  And  Christian  scholars  must 
keep  abreast  with  that  advance.  There  is  scarcely  any  science, 
material,  philosophic,  ethical,  or  political,  which  does  not  in 
some  way  contribute  to  the  better  understanding  of  the  Word, 
and  the  whole  wide  field  lies  open  to  you  to  ascertain  what 
the  individual  authors  of  the  books  of  the  Bible,  all  writing  as 
they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  all  writing  under 
the  influence  of  their  personal  characteristics  and  surround- 
ings, moving  freely  in  the  history  of  the  periods  at  which  they 
lived,  reveal  to  us  of  God  and  our  relations  to  Him.  You 
cannot  reach  the  best  results  without  taking  freely  the  widest 
scope  in  your  studies.  Traditions  are,  of  course,  entitled  to 
their  legitimate  weight.  The  fact  that  they  have  been  long 
held  does  not  necessarily  imply,  as  it  is  sometimes  apparently 
thought,  that  they  are  to  be  ignored  or  rejected.  Human  prog- 
ress along  the  various  lines  it  has  produced  is  not  destructive 
of  the  past.  It  conserves  and  garners  with  the  utmost  care  all 
that  it  has  gained,  while  it  refuses  to  be  limited  or  restrained 


Charge.  xiii 


i> 


by  it.  Traditional  interpretations  of  the  Word,  if  they  are 
misleading  or  obscure,  or  hinder  the  progress  of  the  truth, 
should  be  freely  laid  aside.  There  is  no  waste  when  mere  ob- 
structions are  removed.  But  it  should  ever  be  remembered 
that  it  is  a  serious  thing  to  break  up  cherished  convictions,  to 
distress  believing  souls  with  needless  doubts  and  apprehen- 
sions, to  wrest  from  them  the  forms  of  truth  which  to  them 
are  instinct  with  the  truth  itself,  and  give  them  nothing  to  put 
in  their  place  which  will  stand  the  test  of  either  science  or 
experience.  We  must  insist  upon  the  distinction  between  the 
inspired  Word,  which  is  changeless  and  errorless,  and  the  hu- 
man interpretations  of  it,  which  are  varied  and  may  be  wide 
of  the  truth.  You  will,  doubtless,  feel  how  grave  and  serious 
your  line  of  study  is,  which  brings  you  into  the  closest  con- 
tact with  the  most  sacred  beliefs  of  the  human  heart  and  of 
the  ages.  They  are  things  which  must  be  treated  with  the 
greatest  care.  But  we  lay  no  restrictions  upon  you,  but  fidelity 
to  the  truth  and  to  God.  What  we  wish  in  your  chair,  and 
in  every  other  chair  in  this  Seminary,  is  just  that  you  may  find 
what  God  teaches,  what  He  has  revealed  to  us  in  His  Word  of 
Himself  and  of  His  will  for  our  salvation.  Give  us  this  and 
we  shall  be  satisfied. 

The  highest  freedom  we  can  conceive  of  is  that  which  is 
found  in  the  angels  who  do  His  commandments.  There  are 
no  bonds  in  their  service,  no  craven  fears  as  they  veil  their 
faces  and  bow  in  awe  before  the  splendors  of  His  throne. 
This  is  the  freedom  for  which  we  pray :  "  Thy  will  be  done  on 
earth  as  it  is  in  heaven."  This  freedom  and  reverence  not 
only  co-exist,  but  measure  each  other.  The  most  profound 
reverence  and  the  most  perfect  freedom  are  essential  to  the 
successful  study  of  the  Word.  It  is  the  Word  of  God,  and 
therefore  to  be  handled  with  the  greatest  reverence ;  it  is  the 
Word  of  God  spoken  by  inspired  men,  in  varied  surroundings 
and  with  varying  degrees  of  completeness,  and  therefore  to  be 
treated  with  entire  freedom.  And  there  is  no  attitude  of  the 
human  spirit  which  so  opens  it  to  the  pure  light  of  truth, 
which  so  clears  away  the  films  which  have  clouded  its  vision, 


x\v  Charge. 

which  brings  it  so  near  the  very  source  of  truth,  as  this 
reverential  boldness,  or  this  free  and  filial  reverence.  A  man 
may  be  learned  in  the  Scriptures  and  in  all  kindred  studies ; 
but  if  he  is  flippant,  self-conceited,  boastful  and  arrogant,  we 
may  be  sure  that  he  has  no  profound  views  of  God,  and  is  an 
unsafe  guide  to  truth.  It  is  the  man  who  lies  in  the  deepest 
humility  and  forgetfulness  of  self  whose  eye  God  opens  and 
makes  him  a  teacher  of  men. 

You  will  need  a  broad  and  generous  culture,  a  wide  ac- 
quaintance with  all  kindred  branches,  to  avail  yourself  of  the 
light  which  may  aid  you  in  the  solution  of  difficulties,  or  in 
setting  forth  the  truth  in  its  fullness.  This  is  emphatically 
true  now  when  so  much  is  done  to  bring  before  us  the  actual 
life,  or  the  vivid  picture  of  the  life  of  men,  in  the  periods 
covered  by  the  Bible, — the  condition  of  men  in  their  every- 
day life,  their  physical,  mental,  moral,  and  religious  progress, 
their  position  with  reference  to  the  arts  and  civilization,  the 
ties  which  bound  them  together,  the  walls  which  separated 
them ;  when,  more  particularly,  the  two  great  world  powers 
with  which  the  people  of  God  came  into  the  closest  historical 
relations,  are  revealing  to  us,  in  their  stone-libraries  and  rec- 
ords, their  inner  life,  their  policies  and  arts,  their  prowess  in 
arms,  their  victories  and  defeats,  the  rise  and  fall  of  dynasties, 
their  religious  faith  and  worship,  and  the  great  racial  move- 
ments which  underlie  them.  All  this  gives  an  interesting  and 
important  line  of  study.  It  is  a  side  line  indeed,  but  it 
throws  light  upon  the  main  line  along  which  your  studies 
must  run. 

You  are  here,  my  dear  brother,  primarily  to  aid  in  fitting 
young  men  for  the  ministry  of  Christ,  but  you  are  here  also, — 
and  I  desire  to  impress  it  upon  you  now, — you  are  here  also  for 
the  vindication  of  the  truth,  for  the  more  complete  and  orderly 
unfolding  of  it,  as  it  lies  in  the  Word,  and  for  the  confirmation 
of  the  faith  of  God's  people.  While  recognizing  fully  that 
your  regular  work  will  tax  your  time  and  strength,  and  that 
we  have  no  right  to  demand  anything  more,  I  still  venture  to 
urge  upon  you  the  claims  of  these  wider  interests.     At  the 


Charge.  xv 

proper  time  give  the  Church  the  ripe  fruit  of  your  studies 
through  the  press.  Use  your  class-room  first,  but  use  your 
pen  also. 

In  behalf  of  the  Directors  of  this  Seminary  I  welcome  you 
heartily  to  this  chair,  and  pray  that  God  may  crown  you  with 
His  richest  blessing. 


THE   IDEA   OF   BIBLICAL   THEOLOGY   AS   A 

SCIENCE   AND   AS   A  THEOLOGICAL 

DISCIPLINE. 


INAUGURAL    ADDRESS 


BT 


THE    REV.    GEERHARDUS    VOS,    Ph.D.,    D.D. 


INAUGURAL  ADDRESS. 


Mr.   President  and   Gentlemen  of  the  Board  of 
Directors : 

It  is  with  no  little  hesitation  that  I  enter  upon  the 
work   to  which  you  have  called  me  and  to-day  more 
formally  introduced  me.    In  reaching  the  conclusion  that 
it  was  my  duty  to  accept  the  call  with  which  you  had 
honored  me,  I  was  keenly  alive  to  the  incongruity  of 
my  name  being  associated  in  the  remotest  manner  with 
the  names  of  those  illustrious  men  through  whom  God 
has  glorified  Himself  in  this  institution.     Some  of  those 
at  whose  feet   I   used  to  sit  while  a  student  here,  are 
fallen    asleep ;    a    smaller    number    remain    until    now. 
The  memory  of  the  former  as  well  as  the  presence  of  the 
latter  make  me  realize  my  weakness  even   more  pro- 
foundly   than    the    inherent    difficulty    of  the  duties  I 
shall  have  to  discharge.     While,  however,  on  the  one 
hand,  there  is  something  in  these  associations  that  might 
well  fill  me  with  misgivings  at  this  moment,  I  shall  not 
endeavor  to  conceal  that  on  the  other  hand  they  are  to 
me  a  source  of  inspiration.     In  view  of  my  own  insuffi- 
ciency I  rejoice  all  the  more  in  having  behind  and  around 
me  this  cloud  of  witnesses.     I  am  thoroughly  convinced 
that  in  no  other  place  or  environment  could  the  sacred 
influences  of  the  past  be  brought  to  bear  upon  me  with 
a  purer  and  mightier  impulse  to  strengthen  and  inspire 
me  than  here.     The  pledge  to  which   I   have  just  sub- 


4  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

scribed  is  itself  a  symbol  of  this  continuity  between  the 
past  and  the  future ;  and  I  feel  that  it  will  act  upon  me^ 
not  merely  by  outward  restraint,  but  with  an  inwardly 
constraining  power,  being  a  privilege  as  well  as  an  obli- 
gation. 

Although  not  a  new  study,  yet  Biblical  Theology  is. 
a  new  chair,  in  this  Seminary ;  and  this  fact  has  deter- 
mined the  choice  of  the  subject  on  which  I  purpose  to 
address  you.  Under  ordinary  circumstances,  the  treat- 
ment of  some  special  subject  of  investigation  would 
have  been  more  appropriate,  and  perhaps  more  interest- 
ing to  you,  than  a  discussion  of  general  principles.  But 
Biblical  Theology  being  a  recent  arrival  in  the  Semi- 
nary curriculum  and  having  been  entrusted  to  my  special 
care  and  keeping,  I  consider  it  my  duty  to  introduce  ta 
you  this  branch  of  theological  science,  and  to  describe, 
in  general  terms  at  least,  its  nature  and  the  manner  in 
which  I  hope  to  teach  it. 

This  is  all  the  more  necessary  because  of  the  wide 
divergence  of  opinion  in  various  quarters  concerning 
the  standing  of  this  newest  accession  to  the  circle  of 
sacred  studies.  Some  have  lauded  her  to  the  skies  as. 
the  ideal  of  scientific  theology,  in  such  extravagant 
terms  as  to  reflect  seriously  upon  the  character  of  her 
sisters  of  greater  age  and  longer  standing.  Others 
look  upon  the  new-comer  with  suspicion,  or  even  openly 
dispute  her  right  to  a  place  in  the  theological  family. 
We  certainly  owe  it  to  her  and  to  ourselves  to  form  a 
well-grounded  and  intelligent  judgment  on  this  question. 
I  hope  that  what  I  shall  say  will  in  some  degree  shed 
light  on  the  points  at  issue,  and  enable  you  to  judge 
impartially  and  in  accordance  with  the  facts  of  the 
case. 


As  a  Scte7ice  a?id  as  a  Theological  Discipline.        5 

THE    IDEA    OF     BIBLICAL     THEOLOGY     AS    A     SCIENCE    AND 
AS    A    THEOLOGICAL    DISCIPLINE. 

Every  discussion  of  what  is  to  be  understood  by 
Biblical  Theology  ought  to  proceed  from  a  clear  under- 
standing of  what  Theology  is  in  general.  Etymology, 
in  many  cases  a  safer  guide  than  a  priori  constructions, 
tells  us  that  Theology  is  kiiowledge  co7icerning  God,  and 
this  primitive  definition  is  fully  supported  by  encyclo- 
paedic principles.  Only  when  making  Theology  knowl- 
edge concerning  God  do  we  have  the  right  to  call  it  a 
separate  science.  Sciences  are  not  formed  at  haphazard, 
but  according  to  an  objective  principle  of  division.  As 
in  general  science  is  bound  by  its  object  and  must  let 
itself  be  shaped  by  reality  ;  so  likewise  the  classification 
of  sciences,  the  relation  of  the  various  members  in  the 
body  of  universal  knowledge,  has  to  follow  the  great 
lines  by  which  God  has  mapped  out  the  immense  field 
of  the  universe.  The  title  of  a  certain  amount  of 
knowledge  to  be  called  a  separate  science  depends  on  its 
reference  to  such  a  separate  and  specific  object  as  is 
marked  off  by  these  God-drawn  lines  of  distinction. 
We  speak  of  a  science  of  Biology,  because  God  has 
made  the  phenomena  of  life  distinct  from  those  of  inor- 
ganic being.  Now,  from  this  point  of  view  we  must 
say  that  no  science  has  a  clearer  title  to  separate  exist- 
ence than  Theology.  Between  God  as  the  Creator  and 
all  other  things  as  created  the  distinction  is  absolute. 
There  is  not  another  such  gulf  within  the  universe. 
God,  as  distinct  from  the  creature,  is  the  only  legitimate 
object  of  Theology. 

It  will  be  seen,  however,  on  a  moment's  reflection, 
that  Theology  is  not  merely  distinguished  from  the  other 


6  The  Idea  of  Biblical   Theology 

sciences  by  its  object,  but  that  it  also  sustains  an  alto- 
gether unique  relation  to  this  object,  for  which  no  strict 
analogy  can  be  found  elsewhere.  In  all  the  other 
sciences  man  is  the  one  who  of  himself  takes  the  first 
step  in  approaching  the  objective  world,  in  subjecting  it 
to  his  scrutiny,  in  compelling  it  to  submit  to  his  experi- 
ments— in  a  word,  man  is  the  one  who  proceeds  actively 
to  make  nature  reveal  her  facts  and  her  laws.  In  The- 
ology this  relation  between  the  subject  and  object  is 
reversed.  Here  it  is  God  who  takes  the  first  step  to 
approach  man  for  the  purpose  of  disclosing  His  nature, 
nay,  who  creates  man  in  order  that  He  may  have  a  finite 
mind  able  to  receive  the  knowledge  of  His  infinite  per- 
fections. In  Theology  the  object,  far  from  being 
passive,  by  the  act  of  creation  first  posits  the  subject 
over  against  itself,  and  then  as  the  living  God  proceeds 
to  impart  to  this  subject  that  to  which  of  itself  it  would 
have  no  access.  For  "the  things  of  God  none  know- 
eth,  save  the  Spirit  of  God."  Strictly  speaking,  there- 
fore, we  should  say  that  not  God  in  and  for  Himself, 
but  God  in  so  far  as  He  has  revealed  Himself,  is  the 
object  of  Theology. 

Though  applying  to  Theology  in  the  abstract  and  un- 
der all  circumstances,  this  unique  character  has  been 
emphasized  by  the  entrance  of  sin  into  the  human  race. 
In  his  sinful  condition,  while  retaining  some  knowledge 
of  God,  man  for  all  pure  and  adequate  information  in 
divine  things  is  absolutely  dependent  on  that  new  self- 
disclosure  of  God  which  we  call  supernatural  revela- 
tion. By  the  new  birth  and  the  illumination  of  the 
mind  darkened  through  sin,  a  new  subject  is  created. 
By  the  objective  self-manifestation  of  God  as  the  Re- 
deemer, a  new  order  of  things  is  called  into  being.    And 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.        7 

by  the  depositing  of  the  truth  concerning  this  new  or- 
der of  things  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  the  human  mind  is 
enabled  to  obtain  that  new  knowledge  which  is  but  the 
reflection  in  the  regenerate  consciousness  of  an  object- 
ive world  of  divine  acts  and  words. 

This  being  so,  it  follows  immediately  that  the  begin- 
ning of  all  our  Theology  consists  in  the  appropriation 
of  that  supernatural  process  by  which  God  has  made 
Himself  the  object  of  our  knowledge.  We  are  not  left 
to  our  own  choice  here,  as  to  where  we  shall  begin  our 
theological  study.  The  very  nature  of  Theology  re- 
quires us  to  begin  with  those  branches  which  relate  to 
the  revelation-basis  of  our  science.  Our  attitude  from 
the  outset  must  be  a  dependent  and  receptive  one.  To 
let  the  image  of  God's  self-revelation  in  the  Scriptures 
mirror  itself  as  fully  and  clearly  as  possible  in  his  mind, 
is  the  first  and  most  important  duty  of  every  theologian. 
And  it  is  in  accordance  with  this  principle  that,  in  the 
development  of  scientific  theology  through  the  ages,  a 
group  of  studies  have  gradually  been  separated  from  the 
rest  and  begun  to  form  a  smaller  organism  among  them- 
selves, inasmuch  as  the  receptive  attitude  of  the  theo- 
logical consciousness  toward  the  source  of  revelation 
was  the  common  idea  underlying  and  controlling  them. 
This  group  is  usually  designated  by  the  name  of  Exe- 
getical  Theology.  Its  formation  was  not  a  matter 
of  mere  accident,  nor  the  result  of  definite  agreement 
among  theologians;  the  immanent  law  of  the  develop- 
ment of  the  science,  as  rooted  in  its  origin,  has  brought 
it  about  in  a  natural  manner. 

In  classifications  of  this  kind  general  terms  are  apt  to 
acquire  more  or  less  indefinite  meanings.  They  tend  to 
become  formulas  used   for  the  purpose  of  indicating 


8  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

that  certain  studies  belong  together  from  a  practical 
point  of  view  or  according  to  a  methodological  princi- 
ple. In  many  cases  it  would  be  fanciful  to  seek  any 
other  than  a  practical  justification  for  grouping  certain 
branches  together.  So  it  is  clear  on  the  surface  that 
much  is  subsumed  under  the  department  of  Exegetical 
Theology,  which  bears  only  a  very  remote  and  indirect 
relation  to  its  central  idea.  There  are  subservient  and 
preparatory  studies  lying  in  the  periphery  and  but  loosely 
connected  with  the  organic  centre.  Nevertheless,  if 
Exegetical  Theology  is  to  be  more  than  a  conglomer- 
ate of  heterogeneous  studies,  having  no  other  than  a 
practical  unity,  we  must  expect  that  at  its  highest  point 
of  development  it  will  appear  to  embody  one  of  the  nec- 
essary forms  of  the  essential  idea  of  all  Theology,  and 
will  unfold  itself  as  kjiowledge  concerning  God  in  the 
strict  sense  of  the  term.  The  science  in  which  this  act- 
ually happens  will  be  the  heart  of  the  organism  of  Exe- 
getical Theology. 

Exegetical  Theology  deals  with  God  under  the  aspect 
of  Revealer  of  Himself  and  Author  of  the  Scriptures. 
It  is  naturally  divided  into  two  parts,  of  which  the  one 
treats  of  the  formation  of  the  Scriptures,  the  other  of 
the  actual  revelation  of  God  lying  back  of  this  process. 
We  further  observe  that  the  formation  of  the  Scriptures 
serves  no  other  purpose  than  to  perpetuate  and  trans- 
mit the  record  of  God's  self-disclosure  to  the  human 
race  as  a  whole.  Compared  with  revelation  proper,  the 
formation  of  the  Scriptures  appears  as  a  means  to  an  end. 
Bibliology  with  all  its  adjuncts,  therefore,  is  not  the  cen- 
tre of  Exegetical  Theology,  but  is  logically  subordinated 
to  the  other  division,  which  treats  of  revelation  proper. 
Or,  formulating  it  from  the  human  point  of  view,  all 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.       g 

our  investigations  as  to  the  origin  of  tiie  Scriptures, 
their  collection  into  a  Canon,  their  original  text,  as  well 
as  the  exegetical  researches  by  which  the  contents  of 
the  Biblical  writings  are  inductively  ascertained,  ulti- 
mately serve  the  one  purpose  of  teaching  us  what  God 
has  revealed  concerning  Himself.  None  of  these 
studies  find  their  aim  in  themselves,  but  all  have  their 
value  determined  and  their  place  assigned  by  the  one 
central  study  to  which  they  are  leading  up  and  in  which 
they  find  their  culminating  point.  This  central  study 
that  gives  most  adequate  and  natural  expression  to  the 
idea  of  Exegetical  Theology  is  Biblical  Theology. 

In  general,  then,  Biblical  Theology  is  that  part  of 
Exegetical  Theology  which  deals  with  the  revelation  of 
God.  It  makes  use  of  all  the  results  that  have  been 
obtained  by  all  the  preceding  studies  in  this  depart- 
ment. Still,  we  must  endeavor  to  determine  more  pre- 
cisely in  what  sense  this  general  definition  is  to  be  un- 
derstood. For  it  might  be  said  of  Systematic  Theol- 
ogy, nay  of  the  whole  of  Theology,  with  equal  truth, 
that  it  deals  with  supernatural  revelation.  The  specific 
character  of  Biblical  Theology  lies  in  this,  that  it  dis- 
cusses both  the  form  and  contents  of  revelation  from 
the  point  of  view  of  the  revealing  activity  of  God  Him- 
self. In  other  words,  it  deals  with  revelation  in  the  act- 
ive sense,  as  an  act  of  God,  and  tries  to  understand  and 
trace  and  describe  this  act,  so  far  as  this  is  possible  to 
man  and  does  not  elude  our  finite  observation.  In 
Biblical  Theology  both  the  form  and  contents  of  revela- 
tion are  considered  as  parts  and  products  of  a  divine 
work.  In  Systematic  Theology  these  same  contents 
of  revelation  appear,  but  not  under  the  aspect  of  the 
stages  of  a  divine  work  ;   rather  as  the  material   for  a 


lO  The  Idea  of  Biblical   Theology 

human  work  of  classifying  and  systematizing  according 
to  logical  principles.  Biblical  Theology  applies  no 
other  method  of  grouping  and  arranging  these  con- 
tents than  is  given  in  the  divine  economy  of  revelation 
itself. 

From  this  it  follows  that,  in  order  to  obtain  a  more 
definite  conception  of  Biblical  Theology,  we  must  try 
to  gather  the  general  features  of  God's  revealing  work. 
Here,  as  in  other  cases,  the  organism  of  a  science  can 
be  conceived  and  described  only  by  anticipating  its  re- 
sults. The  following  statements,  accordingly,  are  not 
to  be  considered  in  the  light  of  an  «/rz'<?r/ construction, 
but  simply  formulate  what  the  study  of  Biblical  Theol- 
ogy itself  has  taught  us. 

The  first  feature  characteristic  of  supernatural  revela- 
tion is  its  historical  progress.  God  has  not  communi- 
cated to  us  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  as  it  appears  in 
the  calm  light  of  eternity  to  his  own  timeless  vision. 
He  has  not  given  it  in  the  form  of  abstract  propositions 
logically  correlated  and  systematized.  The  simple  fact 
that  it  is  the  task  of  Systematic  Theology  to  reproduce 
revealed  truth  in  such  form,  shows  that  it  does  not  pos- 
sess this  form  from  the  beginning.  The  self-revelation 
of  God  is  a  work  covering  ages,  proceeding  in  a 
sequence  of  revealing  words  and  acts,  appearing  in  a 
long  perspective  of  time.  The  truth  comes  in  the  form 
of  growing  truth,  not  truth  at  rest.  No  doubt  the  ex- 
planation of  this  fact  is  partly  to  besought  in  the  finite- 
ness  of  the  human  understanding.  Even  that  part  of 
the  knowledge  of  God  which  has  been  rev^ealed  to  us 
is  so  overwhelmingly  great  and  so  far  transcends  our 
human  capacities,  is  such  a  flood  of  light,  that  it  had,  as 
it  were,  gradually  to  be  let  in  upon  us,  ray  after  ray,  and 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.      1 1 

not  the  full  radiancy  at  once.  By  imparting  the  ele- 
ments of  the  knowledge  of  Himself  in  a  divinely- 
arranged  sequence  God  has  pointed  out  to  us  the  way 
in  which  we  might  gradually  grasp  and  truly  know 
Him.  This  becomes  still  more  evident,  if  we  remember 
that  this  revelation  is  intended  for  all  ages  and  nations 
and  classes  and  conditions  of  men,  and  therefore  must 
adapt  itself  to  the  most  various  characters  and  tempera- 
ments by  which  it  is  to  be  assimilated. 

We  feel,  however,  that  this  explanation,  however 
plausible  in  itself,  is  but  a  partial  one,  and  can  never 
completely  satisfy.  The  deeper  ground  for  the  historic 
character  of  revelation  cannot  lie  in  the  limitations  of 
the  human  subject,  but  must  be  sought  in  the  nature  of 
revelation  itself.  Revelation  is  not  an  isolated  act  of 
God,  existing  without  connection  with  all  the  other 
divine  acts  of  supernatural  character.  It  constitutes  a 
part  of  that  great  process  of  the  new  creation  through 
which  the  present  universe  as  an  organic  whole  shall  be 
redeemed  from  the  consequences  of  sin  and  restored  to 
its  ideal  state,  which  it  had  originally  in  the  intention  of 
God.  Now,  this  new  creation,  in  the  objective,  univer- 
sal sense,  is  not  something  completed  by  a  single  act  all 
at  once,  but  is  a  history  with  its  own  law  of  organic 
development.  It  could  not  be  otherwise,  inasmuch  as 
at  every  point  it  proceeds  on  the  basis  of  and  in  contact 
with  the  natural  development  of  this  world  and  of  the 
human  race,  and,  the  latter  being  in  the  form  of  history, 
the  former  muse  necessarily  assume  that  form  likewise. 
It  is  simply  owing  to  our  habit  of  unduly  separating 
revelation  from  this  comprehensive  background  of  the 
total  redeeming  work  of  God,  that  we  fail  to  appreciate 
its  historic,  progressive  nature.     We  conceive  of  it  as  a 


1 2  The  Idea  of  Biblical   Theology 

series  of  communications  of  abstract  truth  forming  a 
body  by  itself,  and  are  at  a  loss  to  see  why  this  truth 
should  be  parcelled  out  to  man  little  by  little  and  not 
given  in  its  completeness  at  once.  As  soon  as  we  real- 
ize that  revelation  is  at  almost  every  point  interwoven 
with  and  conditioned  by  the  redeeming  activity  of  God 
in  its  wider  sense,  and  together  with  the  latter  con- 
nected with  the  natural  development  of  the  present 
world,  its  historic  character  becomes  perfectly  intelligible 
and  ceases  to  cause  surprise. 

In  this  great  redeeming  process  two  stages  are  to  be 
distinguished.  First  come  those  acts  of  God  which 
have  a  universal  and  objective  significance,  being  aimed 
at  the  production  of  an  organic  centre  for  the  new  order 
of  things.  After  this  has  been  accomplished,  there  fol- 
lows a  second  stage  during  which  this  objective  redemp- 
tion is  subjectively  applied  to  individuals.  In  both  the 
stages  the  supernatural  element  is  present,  though  in 
the  former,  owing  to  its  objective  character,  it  appears 
more  distinctly  than  in  the  latter.  The  whole  series  of 
redeeming  acts,  culminating  in  the  incarnation  and 
atoning  work  of  the  Mediator  and  the  pouring  out  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  bears  the  signature  of  the  miraculous 
on  its  very  face.  But  the  supernatural,  though  not  ob- 
jectively controllable,  is  none  the  less  present  during 
the  later  stage  in  each  case  where  an  individual  soul  is 
regenerated.  Revelation  as  such,  however,  is  not  co- 
extensive with  this  whole  process  in  both  its  stages. 
Its  history  is  limited  to  the  former  half,  that  is,  it 
accompanies  in  its  progress  the  gradual  unfolding  of 
the  central  and  objective  salvation  of  God,  and  no 
sooner  is  the  latter  accomplished  tlian  revelation  also 
has  run  its  course  and  its  voice  ceases  to  speak.     The 


As  a  Science  ajid  as  a  Theological  DiscipliJie.      13 

reason  for  this  is  obvious.  The  revelation  of  God 
being  not  subjective  and  individual  in  its  nature,  but 
objective  and  addressed  to  the  human  race  as  a  whole, 
it  is  but  natural  that  this  revelation  should  be  embedded 
in  the  channels  of  the  great  objective  history  of  redemp- 
tion and  extend  no  further  than  this.  In  point  of  fact, 
we  see  that,  when  the  finished  salvation  worked  out 
among  Israel  is  stripped  of  its  particularistic  form  to 
extend  to  all  nations,  at  the  same  moment  the  com- 
pleted ox?^Q\t?>  of  God  are  given  to  the  human  race  as  a 
whole  to  be  henceforth  subjectively  studied  and  appro- 
priated. It  is  as  unreasonable  to  expect  revelations 
after  the  close  of  the  Apostolic  age  as  it  would  be  to 
think  that  the  great  saving  facts  of  that  period  can  be 
indefinitely  increased  and  repeated. 

Even  this,  however,  is  not  sufficient  to  show  the  his- 
toric character  of  revelation  in  its  full  extent.  Up  to 
this  point  we  have  only  seen  how  the  disclosure  of  truth 
in  general  follows  the  course  of  the  history  of  redemp- 
tion. We  now  must  add  that  in  not  a  few  cases  revela- 
tion is  ideyitified  with  history.  Besides  making  use  of 
words,  God  has  also  employed  acts  to  reveal  great 
principles  of  truth.  It  is  not  so  much  the  prophetic 
visions  or  miracles  in  the  narrower  sense  that  we  think 
of  in  this  connection.  We  refer  more  specially  to  those 
great,  supernatural,  history-making  acts  of  which  we 
have  examples  in  the  redemption  of  the  covenant- 
people  from  Egypt,  or  in  the  crucifixion  and  resurrec- 
tion of  Christ.  In  these  cases  the  history  itself  forms  a 
part  of  revelation.  There  is  a  self-disclosure  of  God  in 
such  acts.  They  would  speak  even  if  left  to  speak 
for  themselves.  Forming  part  of  history,  these  reveal- 
ing acts  necessarily  assume  historical  relations  among 


14  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

themselves,  and  succeed  one  another  according  to  a 
well-defined  principle  of  historical  sequence.  Further- 
more, we  observe  that  this  system  of  revelation-acts  is 
not  interpolated  into  the  larger  system  of  biblical  his- 
tory after  a  fanciful  and  mechanical  fashion.  The  rela- 
tion between  the  two  systems  is  vital  and  organic. 
These  miraculous  interferences  of  God  to  which  we 
ascribe  a  revealing  character,  furnish  the  great  joints 
and  ligaments  by  which  the  whole  framework  of  sacred 
history  is  held  together,  and  its  entire  structure  deter- 
mined. God's  saving  deeds  mark  the  critical  epochs  of 
history,  and  as  such,  have  continued  to  shape  its  course 
for  centuries  after  their  occurrence. 

Of  course  we  should  never  forget  that,  wherever  reve- 
lation and  the  redemptive  acts  of  God  coincide,  the  lat- 
ter frequently  have  an  ulterior  purpose  extending  be- 
yond the  sphere  of  revelation.  The  crucifixion  and 
resurrection  of  Christ  were  acts  not  exclusively  intended 
to  reveal  something  to  man,  but  primarily  intended  to 
serve  some  definite  purpose  in  reference  to  God.  In  so 
far  as  they  satisfied  the  divine  justice  it  would  be  inac- 
curate to  view  them  under  the  aspect  of  revelation 
primarily  or  exclusively.  Nevertheless,  the  revealing 
element  is  essential  even  in  their  case,  the  two  ends  of 
satisfaction  and  of  revelation  being  combined  into  one. 
And  in  the  second  place,  we  must  remember  that  the 
revealing  acts  of  God  never  appear  separated  from  His 
verbal  communications  of  truth.  Word  and  act  always 
accompany  each  other,  and  in  their  interdependence 
strikingly  illustrate  our  former  statement,  to  the  effect 
that  revelation  is  organically  connected  with  the  intro- 
duction of  a  new  order  of  things  into  this  sinful  world. 
Revelation  is  the  light  of  this  new  world  which  God  has 


As  a  Scie7ice  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.      15 

called  into  being.  The  light  needs  the  reality  and  the 
reality  needs  the  light  to  produce  the  vision  of  the 
beautiful  creation  of  His  grace.  To  apply  the  Kantian 
phraseology  to  a  higher  subject,  without  God's  acts  the 
words  would  be  empty,  without  His  words  the  acts 
would  be  blind. 

A  second  ground  for  the  historic  character  of  revela- 
tion may  be  found  in  its  eminently  practical  aspect. 
The  knowledge  of  God  communicated  by  it  is  nowhere 
for  a  purely  intellectual  purpose.  From  beginning  to 
end  it  is  a  knowledge  intended  to  enter  into  the  actual 
life  of  man,  to  be  worked  out  by  him  in  all  its  practical 
bearings.  The  Shemitic,  and  in  particular  the  Biblical, 
conception  of  knowledge  is  distinguished  from  the 
Greek,  more  intellectualistic  idea,  by  the  prominence  of 
this  practical  element.  To  know,  in  the  Shemitic  sense, 
is  to  have  the  consciousness  of  the  reality  and  the  prop- 
erties of  something  interwoven  with  one's  life  through 
the  closest  intercourse  and  communion  attainable.  Now 
in  this  manner  God  has  interwoven  the  supernaturally 
communicated  knowledge  of  Himself  with  the  historic 
life  of  the  chosen  race,  so  as  to  secure  for  it  a  practical 
form  from  the  beginning.  Revelation  is  connected 
throughout  with  the  fate  of  Israel.  Its  disclosures  arise 
from  the  necessities  of  that  nation,  and  are  adjusted  to 
its  capacities.  It  is  such  a  living  historical  thing  that  it 
has  shaped  the  very  life  of  this  nation  into  the  midst  of 
which  it  descended.  The  importance  of  this  aspect  of 
revelation  has  found  its  clearest  expression  in  the  idea 
of  the  covenant  as  the  form  of  God's  progressive  self- 
communication  to  Israel.  God  has  not  revealed  Him- 
self in  a  school,  but  in  the  covenant ;  and  the  covenant 
as  a  communion  of  life  is  all-comprehensive,  embracing 


i6  The  Idea  of  Biblical   Theology 

all  the  conditions  and  interests  of  those  contracting  it. 
There  is  a  knowledge  and  an  imparting  of  knowledge 
here,  but  in  a  most  practical  way  and  not  merely  by 
theoretical  instruction. 

If  in  the  foregoing  we  have  correctly  described  the 
most  general  character  of  revelation,  we  may  enlarge 
our  definition  of  Biblical  Theology  by  saying  that  it  is 
that  part  of  Exegetical  Theology  which  deals  with  the 
revelation  of  God  in  its  historic  continuity.  We  must 
now  advance  beyond  this  and  inquire  more  particularly 
in  what. specific  type  of  history  God  has  chosen  to  em- 
body His  revelation.  The  idea  of  historic  development  is 
not  sufficiently  definite  of  itself  to  explain  the  manner 
in  which  divine  truth  has  been  progressively  revealed. 
It  is  not  until  we  ascribe  to  this  progress  an  organic 
character  that  the  full  significance  of  the  historic  princi- 
ple springs  into  view. 

The  truth  of  revelation,  if  it  is  to  retain  its  divine  and 
absolute  character  at  all,  must  be  perfect  from  the  begin- 
ning. Biblical  Theology  deals  with  it  as  a  product  of  a 
supernatural  divine  activity,  and  is  therefore  bound  by 
its  own  principle  to  maintain  the  perfection  of  revealed 
truth  in  all  its  stages.  When,  nevertheless,  Biblical 
Theology  also  undertakes  to  show  how  the  truth  has  been 
gradually  set  forth  in  greater  fullness  and  clearness,  these 
two  facts  can  be  reconciled  in  no  other  way  than  by 
assuming  that  the  advance  in  revelation  resembles  the 
organic  process,  through  which  out  of  the  perfect  germ 
the  perfect  plant  and  flower  and  fruit  are  successively 
produced. 

Although  the  knowledge  of  God  has  received  material 
increase  through  the  ages,  this  increase  nowhere  shows 
the  features  of  external  accretion,  but  throughout  appears 


As  a  Scie7ice  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.      1 7 

as  an  internal  expansion,  an  organic  unfolding  from  with- 
in. The  elements  of  truth,  far  from  being  mechanically 
added  one  to  the  other  in  lifeless  succession,  are  seen  to 
grow  out  of  each  other,  each  richer  and  fuller  disclosure 
of  the  knowledge  of  God  having  been  prepared  for  by 
what  preceded,  and  being  in  its  turn  preparatory  for 
what  follows.  That  this  is  actually  so,  follows  from  the 
soteriological  purpose  which  revelation  in  the  first  in- 
stance is  intended  to  serve.  At  all  times,  from  the  very 
first  to  the  last,  revealed  truth  has  been  kept  in  close  con- 
tact with  the  wants  and  emergencies  of  the  living  gener- 
ation. And  these  human  needs,  notwithstanding  all 
variations  of  outward  circumstance,  being  essentially  the 
same  in  all  periods,  it  follows  that  the  heart  of  divine 
truth,  that  by  which  men  live,  must  have  been  present 
from  the  outset,  and  that  each  subsequent  increase  con- 
sisted in  the  unfolding  of  what  was  germinally  contained 
in  the  beginning  of  revelation.  The  Gospel  of  Paradise 
is  such  a  germ  in  which  the  Gospel  of  Paul  is  potenti- 
ally present ;  and  the  Gospel  of  Abraham,  of  Moses,  of 
David,  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  are  all  expansions  of 
this  original  message  of  salvation,  each  pointing  forward 
to  the  next  stage  of  growth,  and  bringing  the  Gospel- 
idea  one  step  nearer  to  its  full  realization.  In  this  Gos- 
pel of  Paradise  we  already  discern  the  essential  features 
of  a  covenant-relation,  though  the  formal  notion  of  a 
covenant  does  not  attach  to  it.  And  in  the  covenant- 
promises  given  to  Abraham  these  very  features  reappear, 
assume  greater  distinctness,  and  are  seen  to  grow  to- 
gether, to  crystallize  as  it  were,  into  the  formal  covenant. 
From  this  time  onward  the  expansive  character  of  the 
covenant-idea  shows  itself.  The  covenant  of  Abraham 
contains  the  promise  of  the  Sinaitic  covenant ;  the  lat- 


1 8  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

ter  again,  from  its  very  nature,  gives  rise  to  prophecy ; 
and  prophecy  guards  the  covenant  of  Sinai  from  assum- 
ing a  fixed,  unalterable  form,  the  prophetic  word  being 
a  creative  word  under  the  influence  of  which  the  spirit- 
ual, universal  germs  of  the  covenant  are  quickened  and 
a  new,  higher  order  of  things  is  organically  developed 
from  the  Mosaic  theocracy,  that  new  covenant  of  which 
Jeremiah  spoke,  and  which  our  Saviour  brought  to  light 
by  the  shedding  of  His  blood.  So  dispensation  grows 
out  of  dispensation,  and  the  newest  is  but  the  fully  ex- 
panded flower  of  the  oldest. 

The  same  principle  may  also  be  established  more 
objectively,  if  we  consider  the  specific  manner  in  which 
God  realizes  the  renewal  of  this  sinful  kosmos  in  accord- 
ance with  His  original  purpose.  This  renewal  is  not 
brought  about  by  mechanically  changing  one  part  after 
the  other.  God's  method  is  much  rather  that  of  creating 
within  the  organism  of  the  present  world  the  centre  of 
the  world  of  redemption,  and  then  organically  building 
up  the  new  order  of  things  around  this  centre.  Hence 
from  the  beginning  all  redeeming  acts  of  God  aim  at  the 
creation  and  introduction  of  this  new  organic  principle, 
which  is  none  other  than  Christ.  All  Old  Testament  re- 
demption is  but  the  saving  activity  of  God  workingtoward 
the  realization  of  this  goal,  the  great  supernatural  prelude 
to  the  Incarnation  and  the  Atonement.  And  Christ 
having  appeared  as  the  head  of  the  new  humanity  and 
having  accomplished  His  atoning  work,  the  further  re- 
newal of  the  kosmos  is  effected  through  an  organic 
extension  of  His  power  in  ever  widening  circles.  In 
this  sense  the  Apostle  speaks  of  the  fashioning  anew  of 
the  body  of  our  humiliation,  that  it  may  be  conformed 
to  the  body  of  the  glory  of  Christ,  saying  that  this  will 


As  a  Science  mid  as  a  Theological  Discipline,      1 9 

happen  ''according  to  the  working  whereby  He  is  able  to 
subject  even  all  things  unto  Hiinself  (Phil.  iii.  21).  If, 
then,  this  supernatural  process  of  transformation  pro- 
ceeds on  organic  principles,  and  if,  as  we  have  shown, 
revelation  is  but  the  light  accompanying  it  in  its  course, 
the  reflection  of  its  divine  realities  in  the  sphere  of 
knowledge,  we  cannot  escape  from  the  conclusion  that 
revelation  itself  must  exhibit  a  similar  organic  progress. 
In  point  of  fact,  we  find  that  the  actual  working  of  Old 
Testament  redemption  toward  the  coming  of  Christ  in 
the  flesh,  and  the  advance  of  revealed  knowledge  con- 
cerning Christ,  keep  equal  pace  everywhere.  The  vari- 
ous stages  in  the  g-radual  concentration  of  Messianic 
prophecy,  as  when  the  human  nature  of  our  Saviour  is 
successively  designated  as  the  seed  of  the  woman,  the 
seed  of  Abraham,  the  seed  of  Judah,  the  seed  of  David, 
His  fifrure  assuminc:  more  distinct  features  at  each  narrow- 
ing  of  the  circle — what  are  they  but  disclosures  of  the 
divine  counsel  corresponding  in  each  case  to  new  reali- 
ties and  new  conditions  created  by  His  redeeming  power? 
And  as  in  the  history  of  redemption  there  are  critical 
stages  in  which  the  great  acts  of  God  as  it  were  accumu- 
late, so  we  find  that  at  such  junctures  the  process  of  reve- 
lation is  correspondingly  accelerated,  and  that  a  few 
years  show,  perhaps,  more  rapid  growth  and  greater  ex- 
pansion than  centuries  that  lie  between.  For,  although 
the  development  of  the  root  may  be  slow  and  the  stem 
and  leaves  may  grow  almost  imperceptibly,  there  comes 
a  time  when  the  bud  emerges  in  a  day  and  the  flower 
expands   in  an   hour  to  our  wondering  sight.*     Such 


*  Cf r.     "The    Progress   of    Doctrine    in    the    New   Testament,"   by 
Thomas  Dehany  Bernard,  p.  44. 


20  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

epochs  of  quickened  revelation  were  the  times  of  Abra- 
ham, of  Moses,  of  David,  .and  especially  the  days  of  the 
Son  of  Man. 

This   progress,    moreover,   increases    in   rapidity  the 
nearer  revelation  approaches  to  its  final  goal.     What 
rich  developments,  what  wealth  of  blossoming  and  fruit- 
age are  compressed  within  the  narrow  limits  of   that 
period — no  more  than  one  lifetime — that  is  covered  by 
the  New  Testament !     In  this,  indeed,  we  have  the  most 
striking  proof  of  the  organic  nature  of  the  progress  of 
revelation.     Every  organic  development  serves  to  em- 
body an  idea  ;  and  as  soon  as  this  idea  has  found  full  and 
adequate  expression,  the  organism  receives  the  stamp  of 
perfection  and  develops  no  further.     Because  the  New 
Testament  times  brought  the  final    realization  of  the 
divine  counsel  of  redemption  as  to  its  objective  and  cen- 
tral facts,  therefore  New  Testament  revelation  brought 
the  full-grown  Word  of  God,  in  which  the  new-born 
world,  which  is  complete  in  Christ,  mirrors  itself.     In 
this   final    stage   of   revelation    the   deepest   depths    of 
eternity  are  opened  up  to  the  eye  of  Apostle  and  Seer. 
Hence,  the  frequent  recurrence  of  the  expression,  "be- 
fore the  foundation  of  the  world."     We  feel  at  every 
point  that  the  last  veil  is  drawn  aside  and  that  we  stand 
face  to  face  with  the  disclosure  of  the  great  mystery 
which  was  hidden   in  the  divine  purpose  through  the 
ages.     All  salvation,  all  truth  in  regard  to  man,  has  its 
eternal  foundation  in  the  Triune  God   Himself,      It  is 
this  Triune  God  who  here  reveals  Himself  as  the  ever- 
lasting reality,  from  whom  all  truth  proceeds,  whom  all 
truth  reflects,  be  it  the  little  streamlet  of  Paradise  or 
the  broad  river  of  the  New  Testament  losing  itself  again 
in  the  ocean  of  eternity.     After  this  nothing  higher  can 


As  a  Scie7ice  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.      2 1 

•come.  All  the  separate  lines  along  which  through  the 
ages  revelation  was  carried,  have  converged  and  met  at 
a  single  point.  The  seed  of  the  woman  and  the  Angel 
of  Jehovah  are  become  one  in  the  Incarnate  Word.  And 
as  Christ  is  glorified  once  for  all,  so  from  the  crowning 
glory  and  perfection  of  His  revelation  in  the  New 
Testament  nothing  can  be  taken  away ;  nor  can  any- 
thing be  added  thereunto. 

There  is  one  more  feature  of  the  organic  character  of 
revelation  which  I  must  briefly  allude  to.  Historic 
progress  is  not  the  only  means  used  by  God  to  disclose 
the  full  contents  of  His  eternal  Word.  Side  by  side 
with  it,  we  witness  a  striking  multiformity  of  teaching 
-employed  for  the  same  purpose.  All  along  the  historic 
stem  of  revelation,  branches  are  seen  to  shoot  forth, 
frequently  more  than  one  at  a  time,  each  of  which  helps 
to  realize  the  complete  idea  of  the  truth  for  its  own 
part  and  after  its  own  peculiar  manner.  The  legal,  .the 
prophetic,  the  poetic  elements  in  the  Old  Testament 
are  clearly-distinct  types  of  revelation,  and  in  the  New 
Testament  we  have  something  corresponding  to  these 
in  the  Gospels,  the  Epistles,  the  Apocalypse.  Further, 
within  the  limits  of  these  great  divisions  there  are 
numerous  minor  variations,  closely  associated  with  the 
peculiarities  of  individual  character.  Isaiah  and  Jere- 
miah are  distinct,  and  so  are  John  and  Paul.  And 
this  differentiation  rather  increases  than  decreases 
with  the  progress  of  sacred  history.  It  is  greater 
in  the  New  Testament  than  in  the  Old.  The 
laying  of  the  historic  basis  for  Israel's  covenant- 
life  has  been  recorded  by  one  author,  Moses ;  the 
historic  basis  of  the  New  Testament  dispensation  we 
know  from  the  fourfold  version  of  the  Gospels.     The 


2  2  The  Idea  of  Biblical   Theology 

remainder  of  the  New  Testament  writings  are  in  the 
form  of  letters,  in  which  naturally  the  personal  element 
predominates.  The  more  fully  the  light  shone  upon 
the  realization  of  the  whole  counsel  of  God  and  dis- 
closed its  wide  extent,  the  more  necessary  it  became  ta 
expound  it  in  all  its  bearings,  to  view  it  at  different 
angles,  thus  to  bring  out  what  Paul  calls  the  much- 
variegatcd,  the  manifold,  wisdom  of  God.  For,  God 
bavins:  chosen  to  reveal  the  truth  through  human  in- 
struments,  it  follows  that  these  instruments  must  be 
both  numerous  and  of  varied  adaptation  to  the  common 
end.  Individual  coloring,  therefore,  and  a  peculiar 
manner  of  representation  are  not  only  not  detrimental 
to  a  full  statement  of  the  truth,  but  directly  subservient 
to  it.  God's  method  of  revelation  includes  the  very 
shaping  and  chiselling  of  individualities  for  His  own  ob- 
jective ends.  To  put  it  concretely :  we  must  not  con- 
ceive of  it  as  if  God  found  Paul  "  ready-made,"  as  it 
v^rere,  and  in  using  Paul  as  an  organ  of  revelation,  had 
to  put  up  with  the  fact  that  the  dialectic  mind  of  Paul 
reflected  the  truth  in  a  dialectic,  dogmatic  form  to  the 
detriment  of  the  truth.  The  facts  are  these  :  the  truth 
having  inherently,  besides  other  aspects,  a  dialectic  and 
dogmatic  side,  and  God  intending  to  give  this  side  full 
expression,  chose  Paul  from  the  womb,  moulded  his 
character,  and  gave  him  such  a  training  that  the  truth 
revealed  through  him  necessarily  bore  the  dogmatic  and 
dialectic  impress  of  His  mind.  The  divine  objectivity 
and  the  human  individuality  here  do  not  collide,  nor 
exclude  each  other,  because  the  man  Paul,  with  his 
whole  character,  his  gifts,  and  his  training,  is  subsumed 
under  the  divine  plan.  The  human  is  but  the  glass 
through  which  the  divine  light  is  reflected,  and  all  the 


As  a  Science  a?id  as  a  Theological  Discipline.      23 

sides  and  angles  into  whicli  the  glass  has  been  cut  serve 
no  other  purpose  than  to  distribute  to  us  the  truth  in  all 
the  riches  of  its  prismatic  colors. 

In  some  cases  growth  in  the  organism  of  revelation  is 
closely  dependent  on  this  variety  in  the  type  of  teach- 
ing. There  are  instances  in  which  two  or  more  forms 
of  the  one  truth  have  been  brought  to  light  simultane- 
ously, each  of  which  exercised  a  deepening  and  enlarg- 
ing influence  upon  the  others.  The  Gospel  of  John 
contains  revelations  contemporaneous  with  those  of  the 
Synoptists,  so  that  chronologically  we  can  distribute  its 
material  over  the  pages  of  Matthew,  Mark,  and  Luke. 
Nevertheless,  taken  as  a  whole  and  in  its  unity,  the 
Gospel  of  John  represents  a  fuller  and  wider  self-reve- 
lation of  Christ  than  the  Synoptists ;  and  not  only  so, 
but  it  also  represents  a  type  of  revelation  which  pre- 
supposes the  facts  and  teachings  of  the  other  Gospels, 
and  is,  in  point  of  order,  subsequent  to  them.  The 
same  thing  might  be  said  of  Isaiah  in  its  relation 
to  Micah.  So  the  variety  itself  contributes  to  the  prog- 
ress of  revelation.  Even  in  these  cases  of  contemporane- 
ous development  along  distinct  lines  and  in  independent 
directions,  there  is  a  mysterious  force  at  work,  which 
makes  "  the  several  parts  grow  out  of  and  into  each 
other  with  mutual  support,  so  that  the  whole  body  is 
fitly  joined  together  and  compacted  by  that  which  every 
joint  supplies,  according  to  the  effectual  working  in  the 
measure  of  every  part." 

We  may  now  perhaps  attempt  to  frame  a  complete 
definition  of  our  science.  The  preceding  remarks  have 
shown  that  the  divine  work  of  revelation  did  not  pro- 
ceed contrary  to  all  law,  but  after  a  well-defmed  organic 
principle.     Wherever   there  is  a  group  of  facts  sufli- 


24  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

ciently  distinct  from  their  environment,  and  determined 
by  some  law  of  orderly  sequence,  we  are  justified  in 
making  these  facts  the  object  of  scientific  discussion. 
Far  from  there  being  in  the  conception  of  Biblical 
Theology  anything  at  variance  with  the  idea  of  Theol- 
ogy as  based  on  the  revealed  knowledge  of  God,  we 
have  found  that  the  latter  even  directly  postulates  the 
former.  Biblical  Theology,  rightly  defined,  is  nothing 
else  than  the  exhibition  of  the  orgastic  progress  of  super- 
natural revelation  in  its  historic  continuity  and  multi- 
formity. 

It  must  be  admitted,  however,  that  not  everything 
passing  under  the  name  of  Biblical  Theology  satisfies 
the  requirements  of  this  definition.  From  the  end  of 
the  preceding  century,  when  our  science  first  appears 
as  distinct  from  Dogmatic  Theology,  until  now,  she 
has  stood  under  the  spell  of  un-Biblical  principles. 
Her  very  birth  took  place  under  an  evil  star.  It  was 
the  spirit  of  Rationalism  which  first  led  to  distin- 
guishing in  the  contents  of  the  Scriptures  between  what 
was  purely  human,  individual,  local,  temporal — in  a 
word,  conditioned  by  the  subjectivity  of  the  writers — 
and  what  was  eternally  valid,  divine  truth.  The  latter, 
of  course,  was  identified  with  the  teachings  of  the  shallow 
Rationalism  of  that  period.  Thus  Biblical  Theology, 
which  can  only  rest  on  the  basis  of  revelation,  began  with 
a  denial  of  this  basis ;  and  a  science,  whose  task  it  is 
to  set  forth  the  historic  principles  of  revelation,  was 
trained  up  in  a  school  notorious  for  its  lack  of  historic 
sense.  For  to  this  type  of  Rationalism  history,  as  such, 
is  the  realm  of  the  contingent,  the  relative,  the  arbi- 
trary, whilst  only  the  deliverances  of  pure  reason  possess 
the  predicate  of  absoluteness  and  universal  validity.     In 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.     25 

this  Biblical  Theology  of  Rationalism,  therefore,  the  his- 
torical principle  merely  served  to  eliminate  or  neutral- 
ize the  revelation-principle.  And  since  that  time  all 
the  philosophical  tendencies  that  have  influenced  Theol- 
ogy in  general  have  also  left  their  impress  upon  Biblical 
Theology  in  particular.  It  is  not  necessary  for  our 
present  purpose  to  trace  the  various  lines  and  currents 
of  this  complicated  history  ;  the  less  so  since  there  can 
be  no  doubt  but  that  they  are  rapidly  merging  into  the 
great  stream  of  Evolutionistic  Philosophy,  which,  what- 
ever truth  there  may  be  in  its  application  to  certain 
groups  of  phenomena,  yet,  as  a  generaf^fneory  of  the 
universe,  is  the  most  direct  antithesis  to  the  fundamental 
principles  of  revelation  and  Christianity. 

That  the  influence  of  this  philosophy,  as  it  expresses 
and  in  turn  moulds  the  spirit  of  the  age,  is  perceptible 
in  the  field  of  Theology  everywhere,  no  careful  observer 
of  recent  events  will  deny.  But  Biblical  Theology  is,  per- 
haps, more  than  any  other  branch  of  theological  study 
affected  by  it,  because  its  principle  of  historic  progress  in 
revelation  seems  to  present  certain  analogies  with  the 
evolutionary  scheme,  and  to  offer  exceptional  opportuni- 
ties for  applying  the  latter,  without  departing  too  far  from 
the  real  contents  of  Scripture.  This  analogy,  of  course, 
is  merely  formal,  and  from  a  material  point  of  view  there 
is  a  world-wide  dilTerence  between  that  philosophy  of 
history  which  the  Bible  itself  outlines,  and  which  alone 
Biblical  Theology,  if  it  wishes  to  remain  Biblical,  has  a 
right  to  adopt,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the  so-called 
facts  of  the  Bible  pressed  into  the  evolutionary  formu- 
las. It  is  especially  in  two  respects  that  the  principles 
of  this  philosophy  have  worked  a  radical  departure  from 
the  right  treatment  of  our  science  as  it  is  prescribed  by 


26  The  Idea  of  Biblical   Theology 

both  the  supernatural  character  of  Christianity  and  the 
nature  of  Theology.  In  the  first  place,  evolution  is 
bent  upon  showing  that  the  process  of  development  is 
everywhere  from  the  lower  and  imperfect  to  the  higher 
and  relatively  more  perfect  forms,  from  impure  begin- 
nings through  a  gradual  purification  to  some  ideal  end. 
So  in  regard  to  the  knowledge  of  God,  whose  growth 
we  observe  in  the  Biblical  writings,  evolution  cannot 
rest  until  it  shall  have  traced  its  gradual  advance  from 
sensual,  physical  conceptions  to  ethical  and  spiritual 
ideas,  from  Animism  and  Polytheism  to  Monolatry  and 
Monotheism.  But  this  of  necessity  rules  out  the  reve- 
lation-factor from  Biblical  Theology.  Revelation  as  an 
act  of  God,  theistically  conceived  of,  can  in  no  wise  be 
associated  with  anything  imperfect  or  impure  or  below 
the  standard  of  absolute  truth.  However  much  Chris- 
tian people  may  blind  themselves  to  the  fact,  the  out- 
come will  show,  as  it  does  already  show,  that  the  prin- 
ciples of  supernatural  redemption  and  natural  evolution 
are  mutually  exclusive.  Hence,  even  now,  those  who 
accept  the  evolutionary  construction  of  Biblical  history, 
either  openly  and  without  reserve  renounce  the  idea  of 
supernatural  revelation,  or  strip  it  of  its  objectivity  sa 
as  to  make  it  less  antagonistic  to  that  of  natural  devel- 
opment. In  the  same  degree,  however,  that  the  latter 
is  done,  revelation  loses  its  distinctively  theistic  charac- 
ter and  begins  to  assume  more  and  more  the  features  of 
a  Pantheistic  process,  that  is,  it  ceases  to  be  revelation 
in  the  commonly  accepted  sense  of  the  term. 

In  the  second  place,  the  philosophy  of  evolution  has 
corrupted  Theology  by  introducing  its  leaven  of  meta- 
physical Agnosticism.  Inasmuch  as  only  the  phenom- 
enal world  can    become   an  object  of  knowledge  to  us 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.     27 

and  not  the  mysterious  reality  hidden  behind  the  phe- 
nomena, and  inasmuch  as  Theology  in  the  old,  tradi- 
tional sense  pretended  to  deal  with  such  metaphysical 
realities  as  God  and  heaven  and  immortality,  it  follows 
that  Theology  must  either  be  entirely  abolished,  or  must 
submit  to  such  a  reconstruction  as  will  enable  her  to  re- 
tain a  place  among  the  phenomenalistic  sciences.  The 
former  would  be  the  more  consistent  and  scientific,  but 
the  latter  is  usually  preferred  ;  because  it  is  difficult  at 
one  stroke  to  set  aside  a  thing  so  firmly  rooted  in  the 
past.  Theology,  therefore,  is  now  defined  as  the  science 
of  religion,  and  that,  too,  in  the  sense  chiefly  of  a  phe- 
nomenology of  religion,  in  which  by  far  the  greater  part 
of  the  investigation  is  devoted  to  the  superficial  exter- 
nal side  of  religion,  and  the  heart  of  the  matter  receives 
scant  treatment.  Applied  to  Biblical  Theology,  this 
principle  involves  that  no  longer  the  historic  progress 
of  the  supernatural  revelation  of  God,  but  the  de- 
velopment of  the  religion  recorded  in  the  Biblical 
writings,  shall  become  the  object  of  our  science.  The- 
ology having  become  the  science  of  religion,  Biblical 
Theology  must  needs  become  the  history  of  one,  be  it 
the  greatest,  of  all  religions,  the  history  of  the  religion 
of  Israel  and  of  primitive  Christianity. 

How  far  this  evil  has  penetrated  may  be  inferred  from 
the  fact  that  there  is  scarcely  a  book  on  Biblical  Theology 
in  existence  in  which  this  conception  of  the  object  of  our 
science  is  not  met  with,  and  in  which  it  does  not  very 
largely  determine  the  point  of  view.  It  has  even  viti- 
ated so  excellent  a  work  in  many  respects  as  Oehler's 
Old  Testament  Theology.  Of  course,  there  are  many 
degrees  in  the  thoroughness  with  which  this  subjectiviz- 
ing  principle  is  carried  through  and  applied.     Between 


28  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

those  who  are  just  beginning  to  descend  the  ladder  and 
those  who  have  reached  its  lowest  step,  there  is  a  very 
appreciable  difference. 

First,  there  are  those  who  think  that,  though  God  has 
supernaturally  revealed  Himself  in  words  and  acts,  never- 
theless this  revelation  pure  and  simple,  cannot  be  for  us 
an  object  of  scientific  discussion,  except  in  so  far  as  it 
has  blended  with  and  produced  its  effect  upon  the  religi- 
ous consciousness  of  the  people  to  whom  it  was  given  ; 
and  that,  consequently,  we  must  posit  as  the  object  of 
Biblical  Theology  the  religion  of  the  Bible,  and  can  hope 
at  the  utmost  to  reason  back  from  this  religion  as  the  re- 
sult, to  revelation  as  the  cause  that  has  produced  it.  To 
this  we  would  answer,  that  there  is  no  reason  to  make 
Biblical  Theology,  so  conceived,  a  separate  science.  The 
investigation  of  the  religion  of  Israel  as  a  subjective  phe 
nomenon,  together  with  the  objective  factors  called  in 
to  explain  it,  belongs  nowhere  else  than  in  the  depart- 
ment of  Biblical  History.  Furthermore,  we  believe 
that  the  Bible  itself  has  recorded  for  us  the  interaction 
of  the  objective  and  the  subjective  factors  in  sacred  his- 
tory in  such  a  manner  that  their  joint  product  is  no- 
where made  the  central  thought  of  its  teaching,  but 
much  rather  we  are  invited  everywhere  to  fix  our  gaze 
on  the  objective  self-revelation  of  God,  and  only  in  the 
second  place  to  observe  the  subjective  reflex  of  this 
divine  activity  in  the  religious  consciousness  of  the 
people. 

Others  are  more  reserved  in  their  recognition  of  the 
supernatural.  They  would  confine  the  revelation  of 
God  to  acts,  and  derive  all  the  doctrinal  contents  of  the 
Bible  from  the  source  of  human  reflection  upon  these 
divine  acts.     In  this  manner  a  compromise  is  obtained, 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.     29 

whereby  both  the  objectivity  of  revelation  and  the  sub- 
jective development  of  Biblical  teaching  can  be  af- 
firmed. This  view  is  unsatisfactory,  because  it  loses 
sight  of  the  analogy  between  divine  revelation  and  the 
ordinary  way  in  which  man  communicates  his  thoughts. 
To  man,  made  in  the  image  of  God,  speech  is  the  high- 
est instrument  of  revealing  Himself,  and  it  would  be 
strange  if  God  in  His  self-disclosure  entirely  dispensed 
with  the  use  of  this  instrument.  Nor  does  this  view 
leave  any  place  for  prophecy.  The  prophetic  word  is 
frequently  a  divine  word  preceding  the  divine  act.  Al- 
though, as  we  have  seen,  the  progress  of  revelation  is 
clearly  conditioned  by  the  actual  realization  of  God's 
plan  of  redemption,  yet  this  by  no  means  implies  that 
the  saving  deeds  of  God  always  necessarily  go  before, 
and  the  revelations  which  cast  light  on  them  always 
follow.  In  many  cases  the  revealing  word  comes  as  an 
anticipation  of  the  approaching  events,  as  a  flash  of 
lightning  preceding  the  thunder  of  God's  judgments. 
As  Amos  strikingly  expresses  it :  "  Surely  the  Lord  God 
will  do  nothing,  but  He  revealeth  His  secret  unto  His 
servants  the  prophets  "  (iii.  7). 

The  supernatural  factor,  however,  is  reduced  to  still 
smaller  proportions  and  entirely  deprived  of  its  objec- 
tivity by  a  third  group  of  writers  on  Biblical  Theology. 
According  to  these,  supernatural  revelation  does  not  in- 
volve the  communication  of  divine  thoughts  to  man  in 
any  direct  manner  either  by  words  or  by  actions.  Rev- 
elation consists  in  this,  that  the  Divine  Spirit,  by  an  un- 
conscious process,  stirs  the  depths  of  man's  heart  so  as 
to  cause  the  springing  up  therein  afterward  of  certain 
religious  thoughts  and  feelings,  which  are  as  truly  hu- 
man as  they  are  a  revelation  of  God,  and  are,  therefore, 


30  The  Idea  of  Biblical   Theology 

only  relatively  true.  It  is  owing  to  the  influence  of  the 
Ritschlian  or  Neo-Kantian  school  of  Theology  that 
this  view  has  gained  new  prevalence  of  late.  The  peo- 
ple of  Israel  are  held  to  have  possessed  a  creative  relig- 
ious genius,  just  as  the  Greek  nation  was  endowed  with 
a  creative  genius  in  the  sphere  of  art.  And,  although 
the  productions  of  this  genius  are  ascribed  to  the  im- 
pulse of  the  Divine  Spirit,  yet  this  Spirit  and  His  work- 
ing are  represented  in  such  a  manner  that  their  distinc- 
tion from  the  natural  processes  of  the  human  mind  be- 
comes a  mere  assumption,  exercising  no  influence 
whatever  on  the  interpretation  of  the  phenomenal  side 
of  Israel's  religion.  Writers  of  this  class  deal  as  freely 
Vv'ith  the  facts  and  teachings  of  the  Bible  as  the  most 
extreme  anti-supranaturalists.  But  with  their  evolution- 
istic  treatment  of  the  phenomena  they  combine  the  hy- 
pothesis of  this  mystical  influence  of  the  Spirit,  which 
they  are  pleased  to  call  revelation.  It  is  needless  to  say 
that  revelation  of  this  kind  must  remain  forever  inac- 
cessible to  objective  proof  or  verification.  Whatever 
can  pretend  to  be  scientific  in  this  theory  lacks  all  rap- 
port with  the  idea  of  the  Supernatural,  and  whatever 
there  lingers  in  it  of  diluted  Supernaturalism  lacks  all 
scientific  character. 

I  have  endeavored  to  sketch  with  a  few  strokes 
those  principles  and  tendencies  by  which  the  study 
of  Biblical  Theology  is  almost  exclusively  controlled  at 
the  present  time,  because  they  seem  to  me  to  indicate 
the  points  which  ought  to  receive  special  emphasis  in 
the  construction  of  our  science  on  a  truly  Scriptural 
and  theological  basis.  The  first  of  these  is  the  objective 
character  of  revelatioi.  Biblical  Theology  must  insist 
upon  claiming  for  its  object  not  the  thoughts  and  re- 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipli7ie.     3 1 

flections  and  speculations  of  man,  but  the   oracles  of 
God.     Whosoever  weakens  or  subjectivizes  this  funda- 
mental  idea  of  revelation,  strikes  a   blow  at  the  very 
heart  of  Theology  and   Supernatural  Christianity,  nay, 
of   Theism    itself.     Every   type  of  Biblical   Theology 
bent  upon   ignoring  or  minimizing  this  supreme,  cen- 
tral idea,  is  a  most  dangerous  product.     It  is  an  indis- 
putable fact  that  all  modern  views  of  revelation  which 
are  deficient  in  recognizing  its  objective  character,  fit 
far  better  into  a  Pantheistic  than  into  a  Theistic  theory 
of  the  universe.    If  God  be  the  unconscious  background 
of  the  world,  it  is  altogether  natural  that  His  truth  and 
lio-ht  should  in  a  mysterious  manner  loom  up  from  the 
unexplorable   regions   that  underlie   human   conscious- 
ness, that  in   His  very  act   of  revealing   Himself   He 
should  be  conditioned  and  entangled  and  obstructed  by 
man.     If,  on  the  other   hand,  God   be   conscious  and 
personal,  the  inference  is  that  in  His  self-disclosure  He 
will  assert  and  maintain  His  personality,  so  as  to  place 
His  divine  thoughts  before  us  with  the  stamp  of  divin- 
itv  upon  them,  in  a  truly  objective  manner.     By  mak- 
ins"  revelation,  both  as  to  its  form  and  contents,  a  spe- 
cial  object  of  study,  Biblical  Theology  may  be  expected 
to  contribute  something  toward  upholding  this  import- 
ant   conception    in    its  true   objectivity,    toward   more 
sharply  defining  it  and  guarding  it  from  confusion  with 
all  heterogeneous  ideas. 

The  second  point  to  be  emphasized  in  our  treatment 
of  Biblical  Theology  is  that  the  historical  character  of 
the  truth  is  not  in  any  way  antithetical  to,  but  through- 
out subordinated  to,  its  revealed  character.  Scriptural 
truth  is  not  absolute,  notwithstanding  its  historic  set- 
ting ;  but  the  historic  setting  has  been  employed  by  God 


o- 


The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 


for  the  very  purpose  of  revealing  the  truth,  the  whole 
truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth.  It  is  not  the  duty  of 
Biblical  Theology  to  seek  first  the  historic  features  of 
the  Scriptural  ideas,  and  to  think  that  the  absolute  char- 
acter of  the  truth  as  revealed  of  God  is  something  sec- 
ondary to  be  added  thereunto.  The  reality  of  revela- 
tion should  be  the  supreme  factor  by  which  the  historic 
factor  is  kept  under  control.  With  the  greatest  variety 
of  historical  aspects,  there  can,  nevertheless,  be  no  incon- 
sistencies or  contradictions  in  the  Word  of  God.  The 
student  of  Biblical  Theology  is  not  to  hunt  for  little 
systems  in  the  Bible  that  shall  be  mutually  exclusive, 
or  to  boast  of  his  skill  in  detecting  such  as  a  mark  of 
high  scholarship.  What  has  been  remarked  above,  in 
regard  to  the  place  of  individuality  in  the  plan  of  rev- 
elation, may  be  applied  with  equal  justice  to  the  historic 
phases  through  which  the  progressive  delivery  of  the 
truth  has  passed.  God  has  done  for  the  historic  un- 
folding of  His  word  as  a  whole  what  He  has  done  for 
the  reproduction  of  its  specific  types  and  aspects  through 
the  forming  and  training  of  individuals.  As  He  knew 
Jeremiah  and  Paul  from  the  womb,  so  He  knew  Israel 
and  prepared  Israel  for  its  task.  The  history  of  this 
nation  is  not  a  common  history ;  it  is  sacred  history  in  the 
highest  sense  of  having  been  specially  designed  by  God 
to  become  the  human  receptacle  for  the  truth  from  above. 
In  the  third  place.  Biblical  Theology  should  plant 
itself  squarely  upon  the  truthfulness  of  the  Scriptures 
as  a  whole.  Revelation  proper  announces  and  records 
the  saving  deeds  of  God,  but  a  mere  announcement  and 
record  is  not  sufficient  to  furnish  a  complete  history  of 
redemption,  to  produce  a  living  image  of  the  new  order 
of  things  as  it  is  gradually  called   into   existence.     No 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline,     33 

true  history  can  be  made  by  a  mere  chronicling  of 
events.  Only  by  placing  the  bare  record  of  the  facts 
in  the  light  of  the  principles  which  shape  them,  and  the 
inner  nexus  which  holds  them  together,  is  the  work  of 
the  chronicler  transformed  into  history.  For  this  rea- 
son God  has  not  given  us  His  own  interpretation  of  the 
great  realities  of  redemption  in  the  form  of  a  chronicle, 
but  in  the  form  of  the  historical  organism  of  the  inspired 
Scriptures.  The  direct  revelations  of  God  form  by  far 
the  smaller  part  of  the  contents  of  the  Bible.  These 
are  but  the  scattered  diamonds  woven  into  the  garment 
of  the  truth.  This  garment  itself  is  identical  with  the 
Scriptural  contents  as  a  whole.  And  as  a  whole  it  has 
been  prepared  by  the  hand  of  God.  The  Bible  contains, 
besides  the  simple  record  of  direct  revelations,  the  further 
interpretation  of  these  immediate  disclosures  of  God  by 
inspired  prophets  and  apostles.  Above  all,  it  contains, 
if  I  may  so  call  it,  a  divine  philosophy  of  the  history  of 
redemption  and  of  revelation  in  general  outlines.  And 
whosoever  is  convinced  in  his  heart  of  the  inspiration  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures  and  reads  his  Bible  as  the  Word  of 
God,  cannot,  as  a  student  of  Biblical  Theology,  allow 
himself  to  reject  this  divine  philosophy  and  substitute 
for  it  another  of  his  own  making.  Our  Theology  will 
be  Biblical  in  the  full  sense,  only  when  it  not  merely 
derives  its  material  from  the  Bible,  but  also  accepts  at 
the  hands  of  the  Bible  the  order  in  which  this  material 
is  to  be  grouped  and  located.  I  for  one  am  not 
ashamed  to  say  that  the  teachings  of  Paul  concerning 
the  historic  organism  of  the  Old  Testament  economy 
possess  for  me  greater  authority  than  the  reconstructions 
of  the  same  by  modern  scholars,  however  great  their 
learning  and  critical  acumen. 


34  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

Finally,  in  designating  our  science  2S  Biblical  Theology y 
we  should  not  fail  to  enter  a  protest  against  the  wrong 
inferences  that  may  be  easily  drawn  from  the  use  of  this 
name.  The  name  retains  somewhat  of  the  flavor  of  the 
Rationalism  which  first  adopted  it.  It  almost  unavoid- 
ably creates  an  impression  as  if  in  the  Bible  we  had  the 
beginning  of  the  process  that  later  gave  us  the  works  of 
Origen,  Augustine,  Thomas  Aquinas,  Luther,  and  Cal- 
vin. Hence  some  do  not  hesitate  to  define  Biblical 
Theology  as  the  History  of  Dogmatics  for  Biblical 
times.  To  us  this  sounds  as  strange  and  illogical  as  if 
one  should  compare  the  stars  of  the  firmament  and  their 
history  with  the  work  and  history  of  astronomy.  As 
the  heavens  contain  the  material  for  astronomy  and  the 
crust  of  the  earth  for  geology,  so  the  mighty  creation  of 
the  Word  of  God  furnishes  the  material  for  Theology  in 
this  scientific  sense,  but  is  no  Theology.  It  is  something 
infinitely  higher  than  Theology,  a  world  of  spiritual 
realities,  into  which  all  true  theologians  are  led  by  the 
Spirit  of  the  living  God.  Only  if  we  take  the  term 
Theology  in  its  more  primitive  and  simple  meaning,  as 
the  practical,  historic  knowledge  of  God  imparted  by 
revelation  and  deposited  in  the  Bible,  can  we  justify  the 
use  of  the  now  commonly  accepted  name  of  our  science. 
As  for  the  scientific  elaboration  of  this  God-given  ma- 
terial, this  must  be  held  to  lie  beyond  the  Biblical  pe- 
riod. It  could  only  spring  up  after  revelation  and  the 
formation  of  the  Scriptures  had  been  completed.  The 
utmost  that  can  be  conceded  would  be  that  in  the 
Apostolic  teaching  of  the  New  Testament  the  first  signs 
of  the  beginning  of  this  process  are  discernible.  But  even 
that  which  the  Apostles  teach  is  in  no  sense  primarily  to 
be  viewed  under  the  aspect  of  Theology.     It  is  the  in- 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline.     35 

spired  Word  of  God  before  all  other  things.  No  the- 
ologian would  dare  to  say  of  his  work  what  Paul  said  to 
the  Galatians  :  "  But  though  we  or  an  angel  from  heaven 
should  preach  unto  you  any  gospel  other  than  that  which 
we  preached  unto  you,  let  him  be  anathema"  (i.  8).* 

In  the  foregoing  I  have  endeavored  to  describe  to 
you  the  nature  and  functions  of  Biblical  Theology  as  a 
member  in  the  organism  of  our  scientific  knowledge  of 
God.  I  have  not  forgotten,  however,  that  you  have 
called  me  to  teach  this  science  for  the  eminently  prac- 
tical purpose  of  training  young  men  for  the  ministry  of 
the  Gospel.  Consequently,  I  shall  not  have  acquitted 
myself  of  my  task  on  this  occasion  unless  you  will  per- 
mit me  to  point  out  briefly  what  are  the  advantages  to 
be  expected  from  the  pursuit  of  this  study  in  a  more 
practical  way. 

First  of  all,  Biblical  Theology  exhibits  to  the  student 
of  the  Word  the  organic  structure  of  the  truth  therein 
contained,  and  its  organic  growth  as  the  result  of  reve- 
lation. It  shows  to  him  that  in  the  Bible  there  is  an 
organization  finer,  more  complicated,  more  exquisite 
than  even  the  texture  of  muscles  and  nerves  and  brain 
in  the  human  body  ;  that  its  various  parts  are  interwoven 
and  correlated  in  the  most  subtle  manner,  each  sensitive 
to  the  impressions  received  from  all  the  others,  perfect 
in  itself,  and  yet  dependent  upon  the  rest,  while  in  them 


*  In  view  of  the  Rationalistic  associations  connected  with  the  name 
Biblical  Theology,  and  in  view  of  its  being  actually  used  for  the  propa- 
gation of  erroneous  views,  the  name  History  of  Revelation  would  per- 
haps be  better  adapted  to  express  the  true  nature  of  our  science.  This 
name  has  been  lately  adopted  by  Nosgen  in  his  Geschichte  der  Neutesta- 
mentlichen  Offenbarung. 


o 


6  1  he  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 


and  through  them  all  throbs  as  a  unifying  principle  the 
Spirit  of  God's  living  truth.  If  anything,  then  this  is 
adapted  to  convince  the  student  that  what  the  Bible 
places  before  him  is  not  the  chance  product  of  the 
several  human  minds  that  have  been  engaged  in  its 
composition,  but  the  workmanship  of  none  other  than 
God  Himself.  The  organic  structure  of  the  truth  and 
the  organic  development  of  revelation  as  portrayed  in  the 
Bible  bear  exactly  the  same  relation  to  Supernaturalism 
that  the  argument  from  design  in  nature  bears  to  Theism. 
Both  arguments  proceed  on  precisely  analogous  lines. 
If  the  history  of  revelation  actually  is  the  organic  his- 
tory, full  of  evidences  of  design,  which  the  Bible  makes 
it  out  to  be,  then  it  must  have  been  shaped  in  an  alto- 
gether unique  fashion  by  the  revealing  activity  of  God. 

In  the  second  place.  Biblical  Theology  is  suited  to 
furnish  a  most  effective  antidote  to  the  destructive 
critical  views  now  prevailing.  These  modern  theories, 
however  much  may  be  asserted  to  the  contrary,  disor- 
ganize the  Scriptures.  Their  chief  danger  lies,  not  in 
affirmations  concerning  matters  of  minor  importance, 
concerning  errors  in  historical  details,  but  in  the  most 
radical  claims  upsetting  the  inner  organization  of  the 
whole  body  of  truth.  We  have  seen  that  the  course  of 
revelation  is  most  closely  identified  with  the  history 
described  in  the  Bible.  Of  this  history  of  the  Bible, 
this  framework  on  which  the  whole  structure  of  revela- 
tion rests,  the  newest  criticism  asserts  that  it  is  falsified 
and  unhistorical  for  the  greater  part.  All  the  historical 
writings  of  the  Old  Testament  in  their  present  state  are 
tendency-writings.  Even  where  they  embody  older 
and  more  reliable  documents,  the  Deuteronomic  and 
Levitical  paste,  applied  to  them  in  and  after  the  exile. 


As  a  Science  and  as  a  Theological  Discipline,     2>7 

has  obliterated  the  historic  reality.  Now,  if  it  were 
known  anaong  believing  Christians  to  what  an  extent 
these  theories  disorganize  the  Bible,  their  chief  spell 
would  be  broken  ;  and  many  would  repudiate  with  horror 
what  they  now  tolerate  or  view  with  indifference.  There 
is  no  other  way  of  showing  this  than  by  placing  over 
against  the  critical  theories  the  organic  history  of  revela- 
tion, as  the  Bible  itself  constructs  it.  As  soon  as  this  is 
done,  everybody  will  be  able  to  see  at  a  glance  that  the 
two  are  mutually  subversive.  This  very  thing  Biblical 
Theology  endeavors  to  do.  It  thus  meets  the  critical 
assaults,  not  in  a  negative  way  by  defending  point  after 
point  of  the  citadel,  whereby  no  total  effect  is  produced 
and  the  critics  are  always  permitted  to  reply  that  they 
attack  merely  the  outworks,  not  the  central  position  of 
the  faith  ;  but  in  the  most  positive  manner,  by  setting 
forth  what  the  principle  of  revelation  involves  according 
to  the  Bible,  and  how  one  part  of  it  stands  or  falls 
together  with  all  the  others.  The  student  of  Biblical 
Theology  has  the  satisfaction  of  knowing  that  his  treat- 
ment of  Biblical  matters  is  not  prescribed  for  him  ex- 
clusively by  the  tactics  of  his  enemies,  and  that,  while 
most  effectually  defending  the  truth,  he  at  the  same 
time  is  building  the  temple  of  divine  knowledge  on  the 
positive  foundation  of  the  faith. 

In  the  third  place,  I  should  mention  as  a  desirable 
fruit  of  the  study  of  Biblical  Theology,  the  new  life  and 
freshness  which  it  gives  to  the  old  truth,  showing  it  in 
all  its  historic  vividness  and  reality  with  the  dew  of  the 
morning  of  revelation  upon  its  opening  leaves.  It  is 
certainly  not  without  significance  that  God  has  embod- 
ied the  contents  of  revelation,  not  in  a  dogmatic  system, 
but   in  a  book  of  history,  the  parallel  to  which  in   dra- 


T,S  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology 

matic  interest  and  simple  eloquence  is  nowhere  to  be 
found.  It  is  this  that  makes  the  Scriptures  speak  and 
appeal  to  and  touch  the  hearts  and  lead  the  minds  of 
men  captive  to  the  truth  everywhere.  No  one  will  be 
able  to  handle  the  Word  of  God  more  effectually  than  he 
to  whom  the  treasure-chambers  of  its  historic  meaning 
have  been  opened  up.  It  is  this  that  brings  the  divine 
truth  so  near  to  us,  makes  it  as  it  were  bone  of  our  bone 
and  flesh  of  our  flesh,  that  humanizes  it  in  the  same  sense 
that  the  highest  revelation  in  Christ  was  rendered  most 
human  by  the  incarnation.  To  this  historical  character 
of  revelation  we  owe  the  fullness  and  variety  which 
enable  the  Scriptures  to  mete  out  new  treasures  to  all 
ages  without  becoming  exhausted  or  even  fully  ex- 
plored. A  Biblical  Theology  imbued  with  the  devout 
spirit  of  humble  faith  in  the  revealed  Word  of  God,  will 
enrich  the  student  with  all  this  wealth  of  living  truth, 
making  him  in  the  highest  sense  a  householder,  bringing 
forth  out  of  his  treasures  things  new  and  old. 

Fourthly,  Biblical  Theology  is  of  the  greatest  im- 
portance and  value  for  the  study  of  Systematic  Theology. 
It  were  useless  to  deny  that  it  has  been  often  cultivated 
in  a  spirit  more  or  less  hostile  to  the  work  in  which 
Systematic  Theology  is  engaged.  The  very  ndimt  Bibli-^ 
cal  Theology  is  frequently  vaunted  so  as  to  imply  a  pro- 
test against  the  alleged  un- Biblical  character  of  Dog- 
matics. I  desire  to  state  most  emphatically  here,  that 
there  is  nothing  in  the  nature  and  aims  of  Biblical  The- 
ology to  justify  such  an  implication.  For  anything  pre- 
tending to  supplant  Dogmatics  there  is  no  place  in  the 
circle  of  Christian  Theology.  All  attempts  to  show  that 
the  doctrines  developed  and  formulated  by  the  Church 
have  no  real  foundation  in  the  Bible,  stand  themselves 


As  a  Science  a7id  as  a  Theological  Discipline.      39 

without  the  pale  of  Theology,  inasmuch  as  they  imply 
that  Christianity  is  a  purely  natural  phenomenon,  and 
that  the  Church  has  now  for  nineteen  centuries  been 
chasing  her  own  shadow.     Dogmatic  Theology  is,  when 
rightly  cultivated,  as  truly  a  Biblical  and  as  truly  an  in- 
ductive science  as  its  younger  sister.     And  the  latter 
needs  a  constructive  principle  for  arranging  her  facts  as 
well  as  the  former.     The  only  difference  is,  that  in  the 
one  case  this  constructive  principle  is  systematic  and 
logical,  whereas  in  the  other  case  it  is  purely  historical. 
In  other  words,  Systematic  Theology  endeavors  to  con- 
struct a  circle.  Biblical  Theology  seeks  to  reproduce  a 
line.      I   do  not  mean   by  the  use  of  this  figure,  that 
within  Biblical  Theology  there  is  no  grouping  of  facts 
at  all.     The  line  of  which  T  speak  does  not  represent  a 
monotonous  recital  of  revelation,  and  does  not  resemble 
a  string,  even  though  it  be  conceived  of  as  a  string  of 
pearls.     The  line  of  revelation  is  like  the  stem  of  those 
trees  that   grow   in    rings.     Each   successive   ring    has 
grown  out  of  the  preceding  one.     But  out  of  the  sap 
and  vigor  that  is  in  this  stem  there  springs  a  crown  with 
branches  and  leaves  and  flowers  and  fruit.     Such  is  the 
true  relation  between  Biblical  and  Systematic  Theology. 
Dogmatics  is  the  crown  which  grows  out  of  all  the  work 
that  Biblical  Theology  can  accomplish.     And  taught  in 
this  spirit  of  Christian  willingness  to  serve,  our  science 
cannot  fail  to  benefit  Systematic  Theology  in  more  than 
one  respect.     It  will  proclaim  the  fact,  too  often  forgot- 
ten and  denied  in  our  days,  that  true  religion  cannot 
dispense  with  a  solid  basis  of  objective  knowledge  of  the 
truth.     There  is  no  better  means  of  silencing  the  super- 
cilious cant  that  right  believing  is  of  small  importance 
in  the  matter  of  religion,  than  by  showing  what  infinite 


40  The  Idea  of  Biblical  Theology. 

care  our  Father  in  heaven  has  taken  to  reveal  unto  us, 
in  the  utmost  perfection,  the  knowledge  of  what  He  is 
and  does  for  our  salvation.  Biblical  Theology  will  also 
demonstrate  that  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  our  faith 
do  not  rest,  as  many  would  fain  believe,  on  an  arbitrary 
exposition  of  some  isolated  proof-texts.  It  will  not  so 
much  prove  these  doctrines,  as  it  will  do  what  is  far  bet- 
ter than  proof — make  them  grow  out  organically  before 
our  eyes  from  the  stem  of  revelation.  Finally,  it  will 
contribute  to  keep  Systematic  Theology  in  living  con- 
tact with  that  soil  of  divine  realities  from  which  it  must 
draw  all  its  strength  and  power  to  develop  beyond  what 
it  has  already  attained. 

Let  us  not  forget,  however,  that  as  of  all  theology,  so 
of  Biblical  Theology,  the  highest  aim  cannot  lie  in  man, 
or  in  anything  that  serves  the  creature.  Its  most  ex- 
cellent practical  use  is  surely  this,  that  it  grants  us  a  new 
vision  of  the  glory  of  Him  who  has  made  all  things  to 
the  praise  of  His  own  wonderful  name.  As  the  Uncre- 
ated, the  Unchangeable,  Eternal  God,  He  lives  above 
the  sphere  of  history.  He  is  the  Being  and  never  the 
Becoming  One.  And,  no  doubt,  when  once  this  veil  of 
time  shall  be  drawn  aside,  when  we  shall  see  face  to 
face,  then  also  the  necessity  for  viewing  His  knowledge 
in  the  glass  of  history  will  cease.  But  since  on  our 
behalf  and  for  our  salvation  He  has  condescended  to 
work  and  speak  in  the  form  of  time,  and  thus  to 
make  His  works  and  His  speech  partake  of  that  pecul- 
iar glory  that  attaches  to  all  organic  growth,  let  us 
also  seek  to  know  Him  as  the  One  that  is,  that  was, 
and  that  is  to  come,  in  order  that  no  note  may  be  lack- 
ing in  that  psalm  of  praise  to  be  sung  by  the  Church 
into  which  all  our  Theology  must  issue. 


4^.\  m 


